I Can De Moivre's Theorem Simplify Solving Complex Polynomial Equations?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter iScience
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial
iScience
Messages
466
Reaction score
5
I want to keep this question conceptual and qualitative (for now).
I have the following polynomial

$$\frac{(ar-1)(ar-2)(ar-3)(ar-4)(ar-5)}{(r-1)(r-2)(r-3)(r-4)(r-5)} = P$$
where r is the variable I'd like to solve for and P, a are just real constants.

I was wondering whether or not I could use De Moivre's Theorem here. Is there an easier way I can go about solving for r?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
iScience said:
I want to keep this question conceptual and qualitative (for now).
I have the following polynomial

$$\frac{(ar-1)(ar-2)(ar-3)(ar-4)(ar-5)}{(r-1)(r-2)(r-3)(r-4)(r-5)} = P$$
where r is the variable I'd like to solve for and P, a are just real constants.

I was wondering whether or not I could use De Moivre's Theorem here. Is there an easier way I can go about solving for r?
First off, that's not a polynomial, which generally looks like this: ##a_nx^n + a_{n - 1}x^{n - 1} + \dots + a_2x^2 + a_1x + a_0##.
Your function is a rational function, the quotient of two polynomials. In your case, both the numerator and denominator are fifth-degree polynomials.

Regarding your question, I don't think it's possible to solve algebraically for r in the equation you posted, although you can possibly find an approximate solution using some numerical technique.

I don't see how de Moivre's Theorem is even applicable here...
 
iScience said:
I want to keep this question conceptual and qualitative (for now).
I have the following polynomial

$$\frac{(ar-1)(ar-2)(ar-3)(ar-4)(ar-5)}{(r-1)(r-2)(r-3)(r-4)(r-5)} = P$$
where r is the variable I'd like to solve for and P, a are just real constants.

I was wondering whether or not I could use De Moivre's Theorem here. Is there an easier way I can go about solving for r?

There are special cases to consider.

If a = 1 and P \neq 1 there are no solutions. If a =1 and P = 1 there are infinitely many solutions.

If a \in \{2,3,4,5\} then linear factors can be canceled from numerator and denominator. This reduces the problem to solving a polynomial which is of no higher degree than 4; this can always be done analytically.

For all other values of a you will have to solve a quintic, and in general it is not possible to solve quintics analytically. But the case P = 0 is trivial, as your quintic is then already factored.
 
Is there a numerical method to solve something like this?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top