MHB Prove a Polynomial has no real roots

  • Thread starter Thread starter lfdahl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial Roots
AI Thread Summary
Polynomials of the form P_n(x) = x^{2n} - 2x^{2n-1} + 3x^{2n-2} - ... - 2nx + 2n + 1 have been proven to have no real roots. This is established by defining Q_n(x) as a positive function for all x, with a minimum value of n + 1 at x = 1. The proof employs mathematical induction, starting with the base case P_1(x) = Q_1(x) = x^2 - 2x + 3. The inductive step shows that if P_n(x) equals Q_n(x), then P_{n+1}(x) also equals Q_{n+1}(x), maintaining the property of having no real roots. Thus, all polynomials P_n(x) are confirmed to be positive and lack real roots.
lfdahl
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
Prove that polynomials of the form:\[P_n(x)=x^{2n}-2x^{2n-1}+3x^{2n-2}-...-2nx+2n+1, \: \: n = 1,2,...\]- have no real roots.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
lfdahl said:
Prove that polynomials of the form:\[P_n(x)=x^{2n}-2x^{2n-1}+3x^{2n-2}-...-2nx+2n+1, \: \: n = 1,2,...\]- have no real roots.
[sp]Let $Q_n(x) = (x-1)^2(x^{2n-2} + 2x^{2n-4} + 3x^{2n-6} + \ldots + n) + (n+1)$. Then $Q_n(x)>0$ for all $x$. (In fact, $Q_n(x)$ has minimum value $n+1$, when $x=1$, because each term in the expression for $Q_n(x)$ is an even power of either $x$ or $x-1$.) So $Q_n(x)$ has no real roots. It will therefore be sufficient to show that $P_n(x) = Q_n(x).$

To prove that by induction, the base case $P_1(x) = Q_1(x) = x^2 - 2x + 3$ is easy to check.

Suppose that $P_n(x) = Q_n(x)$ for some $n$. Then $$\begin{aligned} P_{n+1}(x) &= x^{2n+2}-2x^{2n+1}+3x^{2n}- \ldots -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2\bigl(x^{2n}-2x^{2n-1}+3x^{2n-2}- \ldots + (2n+1)\bigr) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2P_n(x) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2Q_n(x) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2(x-1)^2(x^{2n-2} + 2x^{2n-4} + 3x^{2n-6} + \ldots + n) + (n+1)x^2 -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= (x-1)^2(x^{2n} + 2x^{2n-2} + 3x^{2n-4} + \ldots + nx^2) + (n+1)(x-1)^2 + (n+2) \\ &= (x-1)^2\bigl(x^{2n} + 2x^{2n-2} + 3x^{2n-4} + \ldots + nx^2 + (n+1)\bigr) + (n+2) \\ &= Q_{n+1}(x) .\end{aligned}$$ That completes the inductive step.[/sp]
 
Opalg said:
[sp]Let $Q_n(x) = (x-1)^2(x^{2n-2} + 2x^{2n-4} + 3x^{2n-6} + \ldots + n) + (n+1)$. Then $Q_n(x)>0$ for all $x$. (In fact, $Q_n(x)$ has minimum value $n+1$, when $x=1$, because each term in the expression for $Q_n(x)$ is an even power of either $x$ or $x-1$.) So $Q_n(x)$ has no real roots. It will therefore be sufficient to show that $P_n(x) = Q_n(x).$

To prove that by induction, the base case $P_1(x) = Q_1(x) = x^2 - 2x + 3$ is easy to check.

Suppose that $P_n(x) = Q_n(x)$ for some $n$. Then $$\begin{aligned} P_{n+1}(x) &= x^{2n+2}-2x^{2n+1}+3x^{2n}- \ldots -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2\bigl(x^{2n}-2x^{2n-1}+3x^{2n-2}- \ldots + (2n+1)\bigr) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2P_n(x) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2Q_n(x) -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= x^2(x-1)^2(x^{2n-2} + 2x^{2n-4} + 3x^{2n-6} + \ldots + n) + (n+1)x^2 -(2n+2)x + (2n+3) \\ &= (x-1)^2(x^{2n} + 2x^{2n-2} + 3x^{2n-4} + \ldots + nx^2) + (n+1)(x-1)^2 + (n+2) \\ &= (x-1)^2\bigl(x^{2n} + 2x^{2n-2} + 3x^{2n-4} + \ldots + nx^2 + (n+1)\bigr) + (n+2) \\ &= Q_{n+1}(x) .\end{aligned}$$ That completes the inductive step.[/sp]

Thankyou very much, Opalg for another brilliant answer!

I am curious :o. Please explain how on Earth you came up with the expression for $Q_n(x)$.
Thankyou in advance.

- - - Updated - - -

An alternative approach:

Note, that $P_n(x) > 0$ for $x \le 0$, since the terms with negative coefficients are multiplied by odd powers of $x$.

Now,
\[P_n(x)+xP_n(x) = x\left ( x^{2n}-x^{2n-1}+x^{2n-2}-...-x+1 \right )+2n+1\]
- so
$$P_n(x) = x\frac{x^{2n+1}+1}{(x+1)^2}+\frac{2n+1}{x+1} \Rightarrow P_n(x) > 0,\: \: x>0.\]
Done.
 
Last edited:
lfdahl said:
I am curious :o. Please explain how on Earth you came up with the expression for $Q_n(x)$.
[sp]That just came from looking at what happens for small values of $n$. You soon find that each $P_n(x)$ (for $n=1,2,3$) has its minimum value when $x=1$, and that this minimum value is $n+1$. That leads to the discovery that $P_n(x) - (n+1)$ has a factor $(x-1)^2$. The quotient of $P_n(x) - (n+1)$ by that factor is $Q_n(x).$[/sp]

lfdahl said:
$$P_n(x) = x\frac{x^{2n+1}+1}{x+1}+2n+1\Rightarrow P_n(x) > 2n+1,\: \: x>0.$$
[sp]That should be $$(1+x)P_n(x) = x\frac{x^{2n+1}+1}{x+1}+2n+1$$, which certainly shows that $P_n(x)>0$ for $x>0$. But it is not so clear from that expression what the minimum value of $P_n(x)$ should be (in fact, it is $n+1$, not $2n+1$).[/sp]
 
[sp]That should be $$(1+x)P_n(x) = x\frac{x^{2n+1}+1}{x+1}+2n+1$$, which certainly shows that $P_n(x)>0$ for $x>0$. But it is not so clear from that expression what the minimum value of $P_n(x)$ should be (in fact, it is $n+1$, not $2n+1$).[/sp]

Oh, yes. I´m sorry for my typo ... I´ll edit my solution right away.
Thankyou, also for explaining the idea that led to the expression of $Q_n(x)$.
 
Last edited:
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...
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...
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

Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top