Irreducible Polynomials from a Reccurence This question is inspired by a recent one : Let $c$ be a variable and define a sequence by $a_0=0$ $a_1=1$ and $a_{n+1}=a_{n}c-a_{n-1}$ . So
$$\begin{align*}
a_2 &= c
\\  a_3 &={c}^{2}-1= \left( c-1 \right)  \left( c+1 \right)
 \\ a_4 &= {c}^{3}-2\,c=c \left( {c}^{2}-2 \right) 
\\ a_5 &={c}^{4}-3\,{c}^{2}+1 = \left( {c}^{2}+c-1 \right)  \left( {c}^{2}-c-1 \right)
\\ a_6 &={c}^{5}-4\,{c}^{3}+3\,c= c \left( c-1 \right)  \left( c+1 \right)  \left( {c}^{2}-3 \right)
\\ a_7 &={c}^{6}-5\,{c}^{4}+6\,{c}^{2}-1=
 \left( {c}^{3}-{c}^{2}-2\,c+1 \right)  \left( {c}^{3}+{c}^{2}-2\,c-1
 \right)
\end{align*}$$

Note that $$a_{n+1}=\sum_{j=0}^t (-1)^j\binom{n-j}{j}c^{n-2j}$$ where $t=\lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor.$ So the array of coefficients is just Pascal's triangle shifted with alternating signs. Not that I see a connection to the questions below.

The defining recurrence $a_{n+1}=a_{n}c-a_{n-1}$ i.e. $$a_{n+1}=a_{n}a_{2}-a_{n-1}a_1$$ is the first non-trivial case (and base for an induction proof of) of the more general
$$a_{n+m}=a_{n}a_{m+1}-a_{n-1}a_{m}. \tag{$\ast$}$$
From this is follows that $$\gcd(a_n,a_m)=a_{\gcd(n,m)} \tag{$\ast \ast$}$$ so the polynomial $a_n$ factors unless, possibly, $n$ is prime. But for any odd index $2m+1$ we have $$a_{(m+1)+m}=a_{m+1}^2-a_{m}^2=(a_{m+1}+a_m)(a_{m+1}-a_m)$$


Q: If $p=2m+1$ is prime, must the monic polynomials $s_p=a_{m+1}+a_m$ and $d_p=a_{m+1}-a_m$ be irreducible in $\mathbb{Z}[c]$?


random remarks
This is the case up to $p=199$ (according to Maple) so it seems likely. 
Replacing $c$ by $-c$ changes $s_p$ into $\pm d_p$ so either both are irreducible or both factor (in the same way).
$a_{m+1}+a_{m}=$$c^m+c^{m-1}-\binom{m-1}{1}c^{m-2}-\binom{m-2}{1}c^{m-3}+\binom{m-3}{2}c^{m-4}+\binom{m-4}{2}c^{m-5}-\cdots$
A heuristic argument (which should perhaps not be trusted) is as follows: For a fixed integer value $c \ge 2$ the $a_n$ become integers but  $(\ast)$ and $(\ast \ast)$ remain true (now as statements in $\mathbb{Z}$) so if a prime $q$ divides $a_k$ for the first time at $k=n$ then it divides $a_k$ exactly when $n \mid k$. Accordingly, when $p=2m+1$ is prime, we have the factorization $a_p=s_p \cdot d_p$ where the two factors are co-prime and any prime $q$ which divides either of them (and hence $a_p$) does not divide $a_k$ for any $k \lt p$. Of course for a given $c$ one or both of $s_p,d_p$ might be composite, but it seems likely (weak!) that each (or even just one or the other) is prime for some value of $c$ and that would require both to be irreducible as polynomials.
When $c$ is set to $c=2$ we have $a_k=k$ so $d_p=a_{m+1}-a_m=1$ and $s_p=a_{m+1}+a_m=2m+1$ is prime when $p$ is. This makes it seem somewhat more likely that the polynomial $s_p$ is irreducible, however there could be factors of the form $(c-2)f(c)+1.$
 A: The polynomials $s_p$ and $d_p$ are indeed irreducible: We have $a_p(c)=s_p(c)d_p(c)$ with $s_p$ and $d_p$ monic of degree $m=(p-1)/2$. Let $z$ be another variable. Then $z^{2m}a_p(z+1/z)=(z^ms_p(z+1/z))(z^md_p(z+1/z))$. The two factors on the right hand side are monic polynomials, and if we show that they are irreducible, then $s_p(x)$ and $d_p(c)$ are irreducible even more.
Using the explicit expression of $a_p(c)$ from Paolo's answer to this related question shows that
\begin{equation}
z^{2m}a_p(z+1/z)=(1+z+\dots+z^{p-2}+z^{p-1})(1-z+\dots-z^{p-2}+z^{p-1})=\Phi(z)\Phi(-z),
\end{equation}
where $\Phi(z)$ is the $p$-th cyclotomic polynomial. But $\Phi(z)$ is well known to be irreducible, and the claim follows.
A: With the substitution $c=x+2$, Eisentstein's criterion can be used. Then the first few polynomials $a_{m}+a_{m+1}$ become
$$\begin{align*} a_0+a_1&=1 \\a_1+a_2&=3+x \\ a_2+a_3&=5+5x+x^2\\a_3+a_4&=7+14x+7x^2+x^3\\a_4+a_5&=9+30x+27x^2+9x^3+x^4\\a_5+a_6&=11+55x+77x^2+44x^3+11x^4+x^5 \end{align*}$$
Evidently,when $p=2m+1$ is prime, the monic polynomial $$a_{m}+a_{m+1}=\left(\sum_{j=0}^{2m}b_jx^j\right)+x^{2m+1}$$ is such that all the coeffcients $b_i$ are multiples of $p$ including $b_0=p.$  If true (which it is), this is exactly what is needed to prove irreducibility. 
It turns out  (eventually) that $$ \begin{align*} b_0&=(2m+1)\\b_1&=(2m+1)\frac{m(m+1)}{3!}\\b_2&=(2m+1)\frac{m(m+1)(m+2)(m+3)}{5!}\end{align*}$$
and in general $$b_i=b_i(m)=\frac{2m+1}{2i+1}\binom{m+i}{2i}.$$
It may not be obvious that these are integers, but they are, and hence, as claimed,  $b_i(m)$ is divisible by $p=2m+1$ when that number is prime.

After the fact, an easier description of the coefficients is as follows:
The odd integers give the constant terms $b_0(m)$  
$[1,3,5,7,9,11,13,\cdots]$ whose partial sums are the squares
$[1,4,9,16,25,36,49,\cdots]$  whose partial sums (with a shift) are the $b_1(m)$
$[0,1,5,14,30,55,91,140,\cdots]$ and their partial sums are
$[0,1,6,20,50,105,196,236,\cdots]$ and their partial sums (with a shift) are the $b_2(m)$
$[0,0,1,7,27,77,182,378,714,\cdots]$ whose partial sums 
$[0,0,1,8,35,\cdots]$ have as partial sums the $b_3(m)$
$[0,0,0,1,9,44,\cdots]$ etc.
