Proving the Division of Power Series: A Rigorous Approach

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the rigorous proof of the division of two power series, specifically how to express the quotient of two power series as another power series. Participants explore the relationships between coefficients and the implications of polynomial multiplication in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the quotient of two power series can be expressed as a new power series, with specific relationships between coefficients defined.
  • Another participant references the distributive law of power series multiplication to relate coefficients, suggesting that the relationship holds for both the constant term and higher-order terms.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about how the previous statements prove the initial claim, suggesting it may merely restate the hypothesis without providing a proof.
  • One participant explains the multiplication of polynomials to illustrate how the coefficients are derived, while also noting the potential issue of convergence for the resulting power series.
  • Another participant briefly agrees with the previous explanation, indicating a positive reception of the argument presented.
  • A later reply introduces the concept of substituting one power series into another, discussing the reciprocal of power series and referencing a specific text on complex analysis for further reading.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of understanding regarding the proof of the division of power series. While some points are acknowledged, there is no consensus on whether the presented arguments adequately prove the initial claim.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the convergence of the resulting power series and the assumptions underlying the manipulation of power series coefficients.

spacediablo
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to show that the quotient of two power series Sum(n=o, infinity)[an*z^n] and Sum(n=0, infinity)[bn*z^n] is the power series Sum(n=0, infinity)[cn*z^n] where c0=a0/b0 and b0cn= (an-Sum(k=0, infinity)[bk*c(n-k)]).
Is there a way of showing this by (Sum[bn*z^n])(Sum[cn*z^n])=Sum[an*z^n] rigorously?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
By the usual distributive law: [tex](\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}b_n z^n) (\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}c_n z^n) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_n z^n[/tex]
where [tex]a_n=\sum_{k=0}^{n} b_k c_{n-k}[/tex].

So [tex]a_0=b_0 c_0[/tex] and for n>0: [tex]b_0 c_n = a_n - \sum_{k=1}^{n}b_k c_{n-k}[/tex]
 
I still don't see how that proves
spacediablo said:
that the quotient of two power series Sum(n=o, infinity)[an*z^n] and Sum(n=0, infinity)[bn*z^n] is the power series Sum(n=0, infinity)[cn*z^n] where c0=a0/b0 and b0cn= (an-Sum(k=0, infinity)[bk*c(n-k)]).
it seems like a restatement of the hypothesis.
 
It just follows from the way we multiply polynomials:

[tex](a_0 + a_1 z + a_2 z^2 + ...)(b_0 + b_1 z + b_2 z^2 + ...) = a_0 b_0 + a_1 b_0 z + a_0 b_1 z + a_0 b_2 z^2 + a_1 b_1 z^2 + a_2 b_0 z^2 + ... = ( a_0 b_0 ) + (a_0 b_1 + a_1 b_0) z + (a_0 b_2 + a_1 b_1 + a_2 b_0) z^2 + ...[/tex]

(Ofcourse you don't know if this power series will converge, but that's a different question)
 
That sounds good

cetin hakimoglu
 
if you know how to substitute one power series into another, since you know the reciprocal of 1-x is 1+x + x^2 + x^3+...

then the reciprocal of any power series with leading term 1, say 1 - u, is 1+u + u^2 + ... where u is a power series with leading term 0.

a nice treatment of power series is in the first few chapters of henri cartan's book on complex analysis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K