P 2n-1 (a)=0 for some a, real.

  • Thread starter Thread starter peripatein
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that for any odd-power polynomial P2n-1, there exists a real number a such that P2n-1(a) = 0. The original poster considers using induction for this proof and questions the validity of their approach, while also mentioning continuity as a potential method.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use induction to prove the existence of a real root for the polynomial. Some participants suggest considering continuity and compactness as alternative approaches. There is a discussion about the validity of using induction and whether the proof presented is complete.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different methods to approach the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of induction and compactness, but there is no explicit consensus on the best method or the completeness of the original poster's proof.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses uncertainty about their proof's validity and completeness, indicating a need for clarification on the use of continuity and compactness in the context of the problem.

peripatein
Messages
868
Reaction score
0
P2n-1(a)=0 for some a, real.

Hi,

Homework Statement



I was wondering whether I could prove the following using induction? I have tried, and was successful, am simply now not sure whether employing induction in this case is just.
I am asked to show that for any odd-power polynomial P2n-1, there exists a number a, real, so that P2n-1(a)=0.
I first thought of using continuity, but wasn't sure how to proceed in that direction so managed to show it via induction. Is it valid?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi peripatein! :smile:
peripatein said:
I first thought of using continuity, but wasn't sure how to proceed in that direction so managed to show it via induction. Is it valid?

induction should be valid (depending how you've done it! :wink:)

have you tried using compactness? :smile:
 


Compactness?
 


Thank you, tiny-tim!

I am afraid I have another question. Could you please tell me whether the following proof is lacking in any regard? I am trying to show that for continuous function f: [a,b] -> R, f([a,b]) is a closed interval.

My attempt:

Using Weierstrass, since f(x) is continuous in [a,b], f(x) must also be bounded in that interval and must have a minimum and maximum. Hence, m <= f([a,b]) <= M
Using Cauchy's mean value theorem, since f(x) is continuous in [a,b], and for every y in [m,M] -> m <= f(a) <= y <= f(b) <= M (or f(b) <= y <= f(a)), then there exists x in [a,b] so that f(x)=y.
I doubt this is complete, moreover I am not certain all of the above statements are indeed correct, or that this is indeed the way to prove it.
May you please advise?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K