Can someone tell me if this is rigorous enough?

  • Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Rigorous
I think it is very difficult to prove anything without first proving simpler things! You are correct that the number of polynomials of degree n with integer coefficients is countable: we can prove that by noting that the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients can be put in 1 to 1 correspondence with the set of all finite sequences of integers and that the set of all finite sequences of integers is countable. But instead of proving that lemma, just point out that, since each Pn has at most n real roots and we are only considering polynomials of degree n, there are only a finite number of such polynomials with any given degree. The union of a finite number of finite sets is finite.
  • #1
quasar_4
290
0

Homework Statement



Prove that the set of algebraic numbers is countable using ONLY the following information:

- We consider algebraic numbers to be the root of a polynomial with integer coefficients
- The height of a polynomial of degree n of the form a0 + a1x + ... + an*x^n
is given by h(P(x)) = n + a0 + |a1| + ... + |an| where a0>0 and an is not zero.
- Show that the set Nk of the zeros of all polynomials of height k is finite.

Homework Equations



Listed above...

The Attempt at a Solution



I can think of at least two other ways to prove this, but our professor requires us to use this method. The part I'm worried about is showing that the set Nk is countable. It seems like it would have to be an induction proof all of its own, but my professor insists I just have to argue "carefully". I'm not sure what that means; any feedback from anyone would be great so that I'll know if I'm meeting the right mark!

Here's what I have:

Consider the set Pk of all polynomials with integer coefficients that are of height k. Let us define the set Nk = {a in R| a is a root of some Pn(x) in Pk}. Now for any fixed value of k and polynomial Pn(x) in Pk, the value of k is constrained by the equation
k >= n + a0 + |an| since a0 >0 and an is non-zero [the other coefficients could be zero].
[this next bit is the handwaving part]
Thus for any height k, the number of polynomials in the set Pk is constrained and is at most countable (or finite). Furthermore, by the zero theorem we have that each Pn(x) in Pk has at most n real roots. Thus for fixed k the number of elements of Nk is at most countable (or finite).
[next is the simple conclusion]
Now the set of algebraic numbers A consists of the set of all zeros of all polynomials with integer coefficients [this is our text's definition], so A = [tex]\bigcup[/tex]Nk . Since each of the Nk is at most countable, we have a union of at most countable sets. By theorem 2.9 [in our text] the union of countable sets is countable, so it follows that A is a countable set.

Ok - please help with the handwaving bit. I'm apparently not allowed to prove a lemma that the set of all polynomials are countable, nor use sequences, it has to be the height thing and Nk being countable, without using induction anywhere... :bugeye:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
quasar_4 said:

Homework Statement



Prove that the set of algebraic numbers is countable using ONLY the following information:

- We consider algebraic numbers to be the root of a polynomial with integer coefficients
- The height of a polynomial of degree n of the form a0 + a1x + ... + an*x^n
is given by h(P(x)) = n + a0 + |a1| + ... + |an| where a0>0 and an is not zero.
- Show that the set Nk of the zeros of all polynomials of height k is finite.

Homework Equations



Listed above...

The Attempt at a Solution



I can think of at least two other ways to prove this, but our professor requires us to use this method. The part I'm worried about is showing that the set Nk is countable. It seems like it would have to be an induction proof all of its own, but my professor insists I just have to argue "carefully". I'm not sure what that means; any feedback from anyone would be great so that I'll know if I'm meeting the right mark!

Here's what I have:

Consider the set Pk of all polynomials with integer coefficients that are of height k. Let us define the set Nk = {a in R| a is a root of some Pn(x) in Pk}. Now for any fixed value of k and polynomial Pn(x) in Pk, the value of k is constrained by the equation
k >= n + a0 + |an| since a0 >0 and an is non-zero [the other coefficients could be zero].
[this next bit is the handwaving part]
Thus for any height k, the number of polynomials in the set Pk is constrained and is at most countable (or finite). Furthermore, by the zero theorem we have that each Pn(x) in Pk has at most n real roots. Thus for fixed k the number of elements of Nk is at most countable (or finite).
Any polynomial in Pk is defined by its k+ 1 coefficients. Thus Pk can be thought of as the Cartesian product of Z with itself k+1 times. You should have already proven that a Cartesian product if a finite number of countable sets is countable (the fact that the set of rational number is countable, for example, is from the fact that it is a subset of Z x Z).
That proves that Pk is countable. Each polynomial in Pk has, at most, k real roots (not "n").

[next is the simple conclusion]
Now the set of algebraic numbers A consists of the set of all zeros of all polynomials with integer coefficients [this is our text's definition], so A = [tex]\bigcup[/tex]Nk . Since each of the Nk is at most countable, we have a union of at most countable sets. By theorem 2.9 [in our text] the union of countable sets is countable, so it follows that A is a countable set.
You have a union of a countable number of countable sets.

Ok - please help with the handwaving bit. I'm apparently not allowed to prove a lemma that the set of all polynomials are countable, nor use sequences, it has to be the height thing and Nk being countable, without using induction anywhere... :bugeye:
I'm not sure why you say you are not allowed to uses lemmas but you certainly could write such a lemma, then just "patch" that proof into the place in the main proof where you use the lemma!
 
  • #3
thanks for the comments!

mathematically it is completely ok to use lemmas. It's just that for some weird reason, our professor wants us to do this problem this way. If I do it any other way I don't get credit. Kinda odd in my opinion, as the goal should be to construct proofs that are reasonable, not just memorizing a single method!

our text also makes this big difference between "countable" and "at most countable", and at the moment it isn't clear to me which statement I'm supposed to be using here... I guess countable, since the sets aren't necessarily finite... :shy:
 
  • #4
In many texts, "countable" means "countably infinite". "At most countable" includes the possibility that the set may be finite.
 

1. What does it mean for a study to be considered rigorous?

For a study to be considered rigorous, it means that it has been conducted using sound scientific methods and has been thoroughly reviewed and validated by experts in the field. This includes having a well-defined research question, using appropriate data collection and analysis techniques, and drawing reliable and valid conclusions based on the findings.

2. How can I determine if my study is rigorous enough?

You can determine if your study is rigorous enough by evaluating it against established criteria for rigor in your field of study. This may include factors such as sample size, research design, data analysis methods, and the use of control groups. It is also helpful to have your study reviewed by peers or colleagues to get their feedback and suggestions for improvement.

3. Why is it important for a study to be rigorous?

Having a rigorous study is important because it ensures that the findings are accurate, reliable, and valid. This allows other researchers to build upon the results and make meaningful contributions to the field. It also ensures that any conclusions drawn from the study are based on solid evidence and can be applied in real-world situations.

4. What are the consequences of not having a rigorous study?

Not having a rigorous study can lead to misleading or incorrect conclusions, which can have serious consequences. It can also damage the credibility of the researcher and the field of study. Additionally, without a rigorous study, it is difficult to replicate the results or build upon them, hindering further progress in the field.

5. Can a study ever be too rigorous?

Yes, a study can be too rigorous in some cases. This can happen if the study design is too complex or the data analysis methods are overly complicated, making it difficult to understand and replicate the results. It is important to strike a balance between rigor and practicality in order to ensure the study is feasible and the findings are meaningful.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
492
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
4K
Back
Top