I think this is my first proof but constructing it

  • Thread starter Thread starter DrummingAtom
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the function y = x³ - 3x + 6 has only one real root. The initial analysis identifies the critical points at x = -1 and x = 1, both yielding positive values for y, indicating the function does not cross the x-axis at these points. Participants emphasize the need for rigor by considering the continuity of cubic functions and invoking the Mean Value Theorem, along with the behavior of the function as x approaches infinity and negative infinity. To strengthen the proof, it is suggested to clarify assumptions about the function's properties and to use limit definitions to demonstrate the existence of a root. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of a thorough mathematical foundation in constructing proofs.
DrummingAtom
Messages
657
Reaction score
2
I should say that I've never really try to "prove" many math theorems from my own point of view. Usually, I will just read through a proof and try to grasp the main concept.

I stumbled upon this problem:

Show that y = x3 - 3x + 6 only has one real root.

It got me thinking that this can be generalized to a whole set of x3 functions will have only one real root as long as both of the min/max values are in the positive y of the graph.

y' = 3x2 - 3

Min/max values: x = -1, 1

If I plug these values into the function I get:

y(-1) = 8
y(1) = 4

Which are both positive.

I then took the 2nd derivative to show that the concavity of both min/max values can only possibly go through the x-axis once. Which happens to be when x < -1.

I'm lost on if that information was enough to "show that" for that particular problem. Furthermore, how can I begin generalizing this to a set of x3 equations?

Thanks for any help.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Nice work, the question begged is how rigorous do you need to be.

What are you assuming about the cubic function which makes your proof work? This is what you need to be explicit about. For example you are assuming continuity. (How do you know cubics are continuous?)
I believe you are invoking also the mean value theorem and the limiting behavior of the cubic as x->infinity and x-> - infinity.

Given the limits you can invoke the limit definition, i.e. there exist sufficiently large x and sufficiently small x such that f(x) is negative for one and positive for the other.

That's the sort of stuff you need to fill into increase the rigor of your argument.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top