A solvable polynomial with no factors?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Nye_Fan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Factors Polynomial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a quartic polynomial, specifically the equation x^4 - 8x^2 + 224x - 160 = 0. Participants explore the nature of its roots, the possibility of factorization, and the implications of the fundamental theorem of algebra. The conversation includes numerical methods, symbolic representations, and the limitations of calculators in expressing solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the polynomial has real solutions but cannot be factored easily, leading to confusion about the relationship between roots and factorization.
  • Another participant suggests that the solutions could be irrational or complex, indicating that numerical methods may be necessary to approximate them.
  • Wolfram Alpha is mentioned as providing both real and complex roots, with a suggestion to use the "Exact Form" option for symbolic expressions.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of calculators in expressing certain roots in fractional or surd form, with one participant expressing frustration over this issue.
  • One participant clarifies that while a polynomial may have no "easy factors," it can still be factored into linear factors with complex coefficients, as stated by the fundamental theorem of algebra.
  • It is proposed that if the given roots are accurate, they can be used to derive additional factors through polynomial division, leading to further exploration of the polynomial's roots.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the polynomial's factorization and the implications of its roots. While some agree on the existence of real solutions, there is no consensus on the ease of factorization or the nature of the remaining roots.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that higher-degree polynomials may have real solutions that cannot be expressed in simple forms, highlighting the complexity of polynomial factorization beyond quartics.

Bill_Nye_Fan
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
I seem to have encountered a situation in which I have a quartic which has solutions, but no factors.

The polynomial is: x^4 - 8x^2 + 224x - 160 = 0

I attempted to find the factors for this quartic in the following manor
f(x) = x^4 - 8x^2 + 224x - 160
f(1) = (1)^4 - 8(1)^2 + 224(1) - 160
f(1) = 60
f(2) = (2)^4 - 8(2)^2 + 224(2) - 160
f(2) = 272
...
f(8) = (8)^4 - 8(8)^2 + 224(8) - 160
f(8) = 5216

So basically, after I got 8 (negative versions included) I gave up on this method and decided to attempt to factorise it on my calculator. However, my calculator refuses to break down this equation into it's respective equations. However, when I solve the equation it gives me two, real answers: x = -6.705505492, x = 0.7321472234. Also, the calculator refuses to give these answers in standard form, only decimal form. Normally when I solve an equation in standard form, it gives me the answer in fractional, surd, or even trigonometrical form.

This is really confusing me, so if anyone could explain to me how it is possible for an equation to have real answers, yet it can't be factorised?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
First guess, is either the solutions are irrational, or they are complex with imaginary components, or both. If any real solutions, there are some numerical ways of approximately finding them.
 
Wolfram Alpha gives one positive real and one negative real root along with a pair of complex conjugate roots.

If you want WA to print the fully symbolic expression for the real or imaginary roots using surds and what not, press the button labelled [Exact Form] next to the real or complex roots. I did it, and I wished I hadn't dunnit.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aikismos
SteamKing said:
Wolfram Alpha gives one positive real and one negative real root along with a pair of complex conjugate roots.

If you want WA to print the fully symbolic expression for the real or imaginary roots using surds and what not, press the button labelled [Exact Form] next to the real or complex roots. I did it, and I wished I hadn't dunnit.

Ah, thanks for that. I knew the answers had to be expressible in some sort of fractional form. Still, it's rather odd my calculator refused to express this specific answer in fractional + surd form... I've seen it spit out some pretty god damn outrageous things in the past (imagine the exact form of this, expect with sine, cosine and tangents thrown in... I think there may have even been a few logarithms too). I wonder why it didn't want to do it for this one? Oh well.
 
Bill Nye said:
Ah, thanks for that. I knew the answers had to be expressible in some sort of fractional form.

Keep in mind that this only applies for quartics and below. 5th degree polynomials and above may have real solutions but in some cases cannot be expressible with any finite mix of fractions, surds, logs, trigs, powers, exponentials, etc.
 
Don't think that "has no easy factors" is the same as "has no factors"! The "fundamental theorem of algebra" says that every polynomial can be factored into linear factors with complex coefficients. If you don't want to deal with complex numbers, it is still true, and follows from the "fundamental theorem of algebra", that any polynomial, with real coefficients, can be factored into a product of linear and quadratic factors with real coefficients.

If it is true that x = -6.705505492 and x = 0.7321472234 are two zeros of the polynomial, then it follows that (x+ 6.705505492) and (x- 0.7321472234) are factors of that polynomial. If you divide the given polynomial by x+ 6.705505492 you should get a third degree polynomial as quotient and 0 remainder. And if you divide that third degree polynomial by x- 0.7321472234, you should get a quadratic polynomial as quotient and 0 remainder.

You can solve that quadratic using the quadratic formula to see if there are two more real roots, so two more linear factors, or if has non-real roots so it is "irreducible" over the real numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K