Complex roots problem (a proof by induction)

In summary: I mean, if you're going to prove it using induction, then, you're going to need a base case, and the only base case you can use is 1 root. That's probably not going to be enough to prove it in general.But, really, it's up to you. I suppose you could argue that you could do it without induction because you understand the underlying principles. But, in general, you should probably show that you're doing induction on something first before you do it.By looking at coefficients, do you mean setting z = 0? If so, then no, that doesn't prove it. As a counterexample, consider the polynomial z^2-1. The sum
  • #1
TomMe
51
0
Problem:

If [tex]c_{1}, ..., c_{n}[/tex] are the complex roots of [tex]a_{n}z^n + a_{n-1}z^{n-1} + ... + a_{1}z + a_{0} = 0[/tex] with [tex]a_{n}[/tex] not 0

and [tex]S_{k}[/tex] is the sum of the products of these roots taken k by k,

then [tex]S_{k} = (-1)^k . \frac{a_{n-k}}{a_{n}}[/tex]. Prove this by using induction.

So for n = 3 this will give:

[tex]S_{1} = c_{1} + c_{2} + c_{3}[/tex]
[tex]S_{2} = c_{1}c_{2} + c_{1}c_{3} + c_{2}c_{3}[/tex]
[tex]S_{3} = c_{1}c_{2}c_{3}[/tex]

Now I am stuck just at the point where I need to prove that

[tex]S_{p} = (-1)^p . \frac{a_{n-p}}{a_{n}} => S_{p+1} = (-1)^{p+1} . \frac{a_{n-(p+1)}}{a_{n}}[/tex]

I thought that by looking at the n = 3 case I would see this connection between S1 and S2, but I can't see it.

Hopefully someone can help me gain some insight. Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Can you rewrite the [itex]a_n[/itex] in terms of the [itex]c_i[/itex]?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
The only way I can see is [tex]a_{n} = (-1)^p . \frac{a_{n-p}}{S_{p}}[/tex] with [tex]S_{p}[/tex] in terms of the [tex]c_{i}[/tex].
But I can't do that since [tex]S_{p}[/tex] could be zero.

No, still don't see it. :frown:
 
Last edited:
  • #4
You know that:
[tex](z-c_1)(z-c_2)(z-c_3)...(z-c_n)=a_nz^n+a_{n-1}z^{n-1}+...a_0z^0[/tex]

right?
 
  • #5
close

[tex]a_n\cdot (z-c_1)(z-c_2)(z-c_3)...(z-c_n)=a_nz^n+a_{n-1}z^{n-1}+...a_0z^0[/tex]
 
  • #6
snoble said:
close

[tex]a_n\cdot (z-c_1)(z-c_2)(z-c_3)...(z-c_n)=a_nz^n+a_{n-1}z^{n-1}+...a_0z^0[/tex]

Oh, yeah, oops. I suppose that explains where the [itex]\frac{}{a_n}[/itex] comes from...
 
  • #7
[tex]a_n\cdot (z-c_1)(z-c_2)(z-c_3)...(z-c_n)=a_nz^n+a_{n-1}z^{n-1}+...a_0z^0[/tex]

Yes I know this. That's what I used with the n = 3 case.
Are you saying I just need to compare both sides and that's my proof? The point of the excercise is to prove it using induction, but I don't see how this helps me.

If k = 1 then yes, I can see that [tex]S_{1} = c_{1} + c_{2} + ... + c_{n} = -1 . \frac{a_{n-1}}{a_{n}}[/tex]
But why does this mean that [tex]S_{2} = \frac{a_{n-2}}{a_{n}}[/tex]?
That's where I'm stuck. :frown:
 
  • #8
Anyone?? :confused:
 
  • #9
Expand [itex]a_n(z - c_1)\dots(z - c_n)[/itex]. Let [itex]a_n = 1[/itex] for now, for simplicity.

n=1:

[tex]z - c_1 = z + a_0[/tex]

[tex]c_1 = -a_0 = (-1)^1a_{1-1}[/tex]

n = 2:

[tex](z - c_1)(z - c_2) = z^2 + (-c_1 - c_2)z + (c_1c_2) = z^2 + a_1z + a_0[/tex]

[tex]-c_1 - c_2 = a_1[/tex]

[tex]c_1 + c_2 = -a_1 = (-1)^1a_{2-1}[/tex]

[tex]c_1c_2 = a_0 = (-1)^2a_{2-2}[/tex]

Does this help?
 
  • #10
It looks like you're trying to do induction on k, which I think is doomed to fail. Try induction on n, the degree of the polynomial. It wouldn't hurt to add another index to your S, [tex]S_{k,n}[/tex].

The idea here is that your degree n polynomial is the product of [tex](z-c_n)[/tex] and a polynomial of degree n-1. You then know the coefficients of this degree n-1 polynomial in terms of it's roots.

You could also save some writing by assuming that [tex]a_n=1[/tex]. If you know the result with 1, it shouldn't be a problem to jump to the general case.
 
  • #11
Well, it has crossed my mind that I was doing induction on the wrong parameter here but was convinced it had to be done this way.

Thanks for your advice. I'll work this out first thing tomorrow morning and let you know how it turns out.
 
  • #12
Okay, I think I have it now by doing induction on n. (with [tex]a_{n} = 1[/tex])

One last question though: is it really necessary to prove this using induction? In my induction step I assumed that [tex]S_{k} = (-1)^k . a_{p-k}[/tex] and so I can rewrite my p-degree polynomial with coefficients in terms of the roots. But I KNOW this is true because if I work out [tex](z-c_{1})...(z-c_{p})[/tex] I get the same answer.
Does this mean I can prove this theorem just by looking at coefficients of the n-degree polynomial?
 
  • #13
TomMe said:
Okay, I think I have it now by doing induction on n. (with [tex]a_{n} = 1[/tex])

One last question though: is it really necessary to prove this using induction? In my induction step I assumed that [tex]S_{k} = (-1)^k . a_{p-k}[/tex] and so I can rewrite my p-degree polynomial with coefficients in terms of the roots. But I KNOW this is true because if I work out [tex](z-c_{1})...(z-c_{p})[/tex] I get the same answer.
Does this mean I can prove this theorem just by looking at coefficients of the n-degree polynomial?

Well, that really depends on what you start with. I've seen proofs that addition is commutative, but, most of the time, people don't bother with stuff like that.
 

1. What is a complex root problem?

A complex root problem is a mathematical problem that involves finding the roots or solutions of a complex polynomial equation.

2. What is a proof by induction?

A proof by induction is a mathematical technique used to prove a statement or theorem for all natural numbers. It involves proving a base case and then using a general rule or pattern to show that the statement is true for all subsequent cases.

3. Why is induction used to solve complex root problems?

Induction is a useful tool for solving complex root problems because it allows us to break down the problem into smaller, more manageable cases, and prove the solution for each case. This approach makes it easier to handle complex equations and ensures that the solution is valid for all cases.

4. What are the steps involved in a proof by induction for complex root problems?

The steps involved in a proof by induction for complex root problems are as follows:
1. Prove the base case, which is usually when the exponent is 1.
2. Assume that the statement is true for some arbitrary value of n.
3. Use this assumption to prove that the statement is also true for n+1.
4. Conclude that the statement is true for all natural numbers.

5. Can a proof by induction be used for any complex root problem?

Yes, a proof by induction can be used for any complex root problem as long as it can be broken down into smaller cases and a general rule or pattern can be identified. However, it may not always be the most efficient method for solving complex root problems. Other techniques such as synthetic division and factoring may be more suitable in certain cases.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
705
Replies
0
Views
747
Replies
2
Views
119
Replies
2
Views
963
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top