Can multivariate non-negative polynomials always be written as a sum of squares?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Danijel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proofs
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether multivariate non-negative polynomials can always be expressed as a sum of squares. Participants explore the implications of proof techniques, particularly in the context of historical contributions from mathematicians like Hilbert and Motzkin.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the nature of proof by counterexample, debating whether it is classified as direct or indirect proof.
  • One participant suggests that disproving a universal statement by providing a counterexample could be seen as a direct proof, despite its connection to the original statement.
  • Another participant notes that the classification of proofs may be arbitrary, indicating that proving one statement can often be framed as disproving another.
  • A historical context is provided, where Hilbert's assertion that not all multivariate non-negative polynomials can be written as sums of squares is described as an indirect proof, while Motzkin's example of a specific polynomial serves as a direct proof of this claim.
  • Participants reflect on the clarity of these distinctions, with one expressing appreciation for the historical explanation provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the classification of proofs, with no consensus reached on whether proof by counterexample is direct or indirect. The historical interpretations of Hilbert's and Motzkin's contributions are acknowledged, but the discussion remains open-ended regarding the implications of these proofs.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities of proof classification and the historical context of mathematical conjectures, with references to specific mathematical techniques and the evolution of understanding in this area.

Danijel
Messages
43
Reaction score
1
Does a proof by counterexample belong to direct or indirect type of proof?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Direct
With an indirect proof, you show that there can be no counter examples.
 
That is what I was thinking. So basically, if we say, for example, show that something doesn't hold universally, our task is to disprove an universal statement, that is to prove the negation of the statement by giving an example. However, this still has some connection to the original statement which says that something holds universally, so I was also thinking that in some way this was indirect. However, if our theorem is (that is, if we look at the negation as the starting statement) to disprove something universal, then we are giving a direct proof by posing an example. It's a little bit confusing. I am still inclining towards the direct whatsoever.
 
Keep in mind that these categories don't have a deeper meaning and the classification is somewhat arbitrary.
You can always say a proof of X (a direct proof) is showing "(not X) is wrong" and therefore proving X (which would make that an indirect proof) or vice versa.
 
Something less abstract may help.

Suppose you're a great mathematician at the end of the 1800s and you show any polynomial with a single variable and real nonnegative coefficients can be written as a sum of squares. You conjecture, what about said polynomial except 2 variables or 3 or ... i.e. is it true that multivariate non-negative polynomial can always be written as a sum of squares?

Hilbert answered this as definitively "no" in 1888 using a lot of powerful analytical machinery but bit he didn't give an example.

About 80 years later Motzkin gave the first (very simple) example of a 2 variable non-negative polynomial that can't be written as a sum of squares. (The proof merely needs ##GM \leq AM##.) People would generally say he directly showed the conjecture to be false by a single example, whereas Hilbert's approach was indirect.

Put differently:
Hilbert showed that these 'rule breaker' polynomials must exist. (Indirect.)

Motzkin directly proved they do exist with a simple example. (Direct.)
 
StoneTemplePython said:
Something less abstract may help.

Suppose you're a great mathematician at the end of the 1800s and you show any polynomial with a single variable and real nonnegative coefficients can be written as a sum of squares. You conjecture, what about said polynomial except 2 variables or 3 or ... i.e. is it true that multivariate non-negative polynomial can always be written as a sum of squares?

Hilbert answered this as definitively "no" in 1888 using a lot of powerful analytical machinery but bit he didn't give an example.

About 80 years later Motzkin gave the first (very simple) example of a 2 variable non-negative polynomial that can't be written as a sum of squares. (The proof merely needs ##GM \leq AM##.) People would generally say he directly showed the conjecture to be false by a single example, whereas Hilbert's approach was indirect.

Put differently:
Hilbert showed that these 'rule breaker' polynomials must exist. (Indirect.)

Motzkin directly proved they do exist with a simple example. (Direct.)
Wow, an excellent answer! Thank you...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
8K