1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Interesting proof

  1. Feb 6, 2005 #1
    How can it be proved that Rnl(r) has (n-l-1) zeros (not counting those at r-0 and r= infinity?

    I tried doing this inductively but found it hard to get anywhere since the equations for Rnl(r) aren't too pretty. For instance, Rnl(r)=Anlunl

    where Anl= sqrt((n-l-1)!/(2n((n+l)!)^3)

    this last equation seems to bear a similarity with what I am supposed to prove but I am having trouble with this. Help anyone?
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 6, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I'm sorry for not sharing your enthusiasm,but i don't find that proof to be interesting... :tongue2:
    Yu can find the general formula for [itex] R_{nl}(r) [/itex] here

    I think you can build the proof really easily.

    Good luck!! :smile:

  4. Feb 6, 2005 #3
    I don't think you need to worry about [tex]A_{nl}[/tex] in your proof, since that is just a constant for a given n and l, and not dependent on r. I think what you want to look at is the Laguerre Polynomials, (specifically their order), and remember what the fundamental theorem of algebra says about how many zeros a polynomial will have, and somehow come up with an argument that those zeros will be real.
  5. Feb 6, 2005 #4
    The link Daniel provided states that
    [tex]R_{n\ell}(r) = r^\ell \exp\left(\frac{zr}{na}\right) \sum_{j=0}^{n-\ell-1} b_jr^j.[/tex]
    The sum is simply the definition of a polynomial of degree [tex]n-\ell-1[/tex], which the fundamental theorem of algebra guarantees will have exactly [tex]n-\ell-1[/tex] complex roots (not necessarily distinct). The coefficients in front of the sum provide the zeros at [tex]r=0[/tex] and [tex] z\to-\infty[/tex], and the others are provided by the polynomial.

    If you need to show that there are [tex]n-\ell-1[/tex] distinct zeros then there will obviously be something more to the proof (I would guess it involves looking at the definition of the [tex]b_j[/tex]), but this might be a good starting point at least....
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2005
  6. Feb 6, 2005 #5
    Ha ha, I just didn't know what to title it. Thanks for help.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Interesting proof
  1. LED interesting things (Replies: 1)