Is Coefficient Pairing in Polynomials Justifiable Through Equality Definition?

aikismos
Messages
145
Reaction score
34
Just to double check, but if one wanted to, like in partial fraction decomposition, associate literal coefficients of polynomials with corresponding unknowns on the other side of the equation, the justification for this action is the definition of equality of polynomials?

EDIT: I know this isn't true. Let's see, ## a - b = 2 ## is as far as it can be reduced.
## 3x^2 + bx = ax^2 + 5x \rightarrow a = 3, b = 5 ##

Another related question is how do I express symbolically that in:

## P(x) = ax^2 + bx ##

P(x) has no constant term?

I'm kinda groping around for a rigorous way to express and justify the pairing of coefficients if you were to write them as two equivalent n-tuples.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I would put everything on the same side and group similar powers of ##x## like this: ##(3-a)x^2+(b-5)x = 0 ##. Since this is true for all ## x ##, and since ## x ## and ## x^2 ## are independent functions (their Wronskian does not vanish), their coefficients must separately each be zero. This is a lot like having, for arrow vectors in the plane, that ## (3-a)\mathbf{i}+(b-5)\mathbf{j} = 0 ##. The only way to add a vector in the ## \mathbf{i} ## direction to one in the ## \mathbf{j}## direction and get zero is if, in fact, both vectors are the zero vector.

For the second question, how about writing it as ## P(0) = 0 ##?
 
aikismos said:
Just to double check, but if one wanted to, like in partial fraction decomposition, associate literal coefficients of polynomials with corresponding unknowns on the other side of the equation, the justification for this action is the definition of equality of polynomials?

EDIT: I know this isn't true. Let's see, ## a - b = 2 ## is as far as it can be reduced.
## 3x^2 + bx = ax^2 + 5x \rightarrow a = 3, b = 5 ##

Another related question is how do I express symbolically that in:

## P(x) = ax^2 + bx ##

P(x) has no constant term?

I'm kinda groping around for a rigorous way to express and justify the pairing of coefficients if you were to write them as two equivalent n-tuples.
In partial fractions decomposition, you're setting up an equation that is true for all values of the independent variable (except those that make any denominator zero). IOW, two expressions that are identically equal.
So, for ## 3x^2 + bx = ax^2 + 5x##, for all x, it must be the case that a = 3 and b = 5.
 
Thanks guys!
 
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