Zeros of reciprocal functions and transformed

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Amad27
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Reciprocal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the properties of reciprocal functions and transformations of polynomial roots, specifically examining the roots of the polynomial \(x^3 - x - 1\) and their reciprocals. Participants explore the mechanisms behind these transformations and seek proofs or explanations for the relationships between the roots and their transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the validity of the statement that if \(a, b, c\) are roots of \(x^3 - x - 1 = 0\), then \(\frac{1}{a}, \frac{1}{b}, \frac{1}{c}\) are roots of \(\frac{1}{x^3} - \frac{1}{x} - 1\), asking for the underlying mechanism.
  • Others discuss the transformation \(f(x - 1)\) and its roots \((a+1), (b+1), (c+1)\), questioning the proof of this transformation.
  • One participant proposes letting \(y = \frac{1}{x}\) and explores how this leads to the conclusion that \(y = \frac{1}{a}\) when \(f(x) = 0\), while emphasizing the need to ensure that \(0\) is not a root of \(f\).
  • Another participant reflects on the reciprocal relationship, stating that if \(x_0\) is a root of \(f(x)\), then \(1/x_0\) is a root of \(f(1/x)\), provided \(x_0 \neq 0\), but questions the general validity of this statement.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the implications of the transformations and seek clarification on the proofs of the relationships discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the mechanisms behind the transformations and the validity of the statements regarding the roots. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the proofs and implications of the reciprocal and shifted roots.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of ensuring that roots do not include zero, as this affects the validity of the reciprocal transformations. There are also discussions about the assumptions underlying the transformations and the need for careful consideration of definitions.

Amad27
Messages
409
Reaction score
1
Hello,

I was recently browsing the thread,

http://mathhelpboards.com/challenge-questions-puzzles-28/evaluate-1-1-1-b-1-b-1-c-1-c-12074.html

And I was browsing both, Kaliprasad's method and anemone's method.

Lets take Kaliprasad's approach first. My question is about the reciprocal zeros, NOT the actual problem... =)

Anywho, it says at the start of his answer,

$a, b, c$ are roots of $x^3 - x - 1 = 0$ and therefore,
$\frac{1}{a} , \frac{1}{b}, \frac{1}{c}$ are the roots of $\frac{1}{x^3} - \frac{1}{x} - 1$

I just want to know the mechanism, behind this. How is this true, what makes this true (more or less)? SECONDLY, anemone's answer, she states,

"We're told that $a, b, c$ are the roots of $f(x) = x^3 - x - 1$, hence the function,

$f(x - 1) = (x-1)^3 - (x-1) - 1 = x^3 - 3x^2 + 2x - 1$ has roots $(a+1), (b+1), (c+1)$

Again, what is the mechanism?

Is there are proof for any of the two?

THANKS!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Olok said:
Hello,

I was recently browsing the thread,

http://mathhelpboards.com/challenge-questions-puzzles-28/evaluate-1-1-1-b-1-b-1-c-1-c-12074.html

And I was browsing both, Kaliprasad's method and anemone's method.

Lets take Kaliprasad's approach first. My question is about the reciprocal zeros, NOT the actual problem... =)

Anywho, it says at the start of his answer,

$a, b, c$ are roots of $x^3 - x - 1 = 0$ and therefore,
$\frac{1}{a} , \frac{1}{b}, \frac{1}{c}$ are the roots of $\frac{1}{x^3} - \frac{1}{x} - 1$

I just want to know the mechanism, behind this. How is this true, what makes this true (more or less)? SECONDLY, anemone's answer, she states,

"We're told that $a, b, c$ are the roots of $f(x) = x^3 - x - 1$, hence the function,

$f(x - 1) = (x-1)^3 - (x-1) - 1 = x^3 - 3x^2 + 2x - 1$ has roots $(a+1), (b+1), (c+1)$

Again, what is the mechanism?

Is there are proof for any of the two?

THANKS!

Suppose that we have:

$f(x) = x^3 - x - 1 = (x - a)(x - b)(x - c) = 0$.

Suppose further, that we let $y = \dfrac{1}{x}$ (assuming that none of $a,b,c$ are 0).

Then $x = \dfrac{1}{y}$ so:

$f(x) = f\left(\frac{1}{y}\right) = \left(\frac{1}{y} - a\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - b\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - c\right)$.

If this is 0, one of the three factors must be 0, so, for example, if:

$\frac{1}{y} - a = 0$ then:

$\frac{1}{y} = a$, and thus:

$y = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)} = \frac{1}{a}$.

This is because if $c,d \neq 0$ then:

$c = d \iff \frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$.

Remember we decide equality of two fractions by "cross-multiplying":

if $\frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$, this means that $(1)(d) = (c)(1)$, that is $c = d$.

Now there is one thing we need to be careful of: we need to be sure 0 is not a root of $f$.

But $f$ has a non-zero constant term, that is: $f(0) \neq 0$, so we are good.

See if you can do the same thing with your second question, letting $y = x + 1$.
 
Deveno said:
Suppose that we have:

$f(x) = x^3 - x - 1 = (x - a)(x - b)(x - c) = 0$.

Suppose further, that we let $y = \dfrac{1}{x}$ (assuming that none of $a,b,c$ are 0).

Then $x = \dfrac{1}{y}$ so:

$f(x) = f\left(\frac{1}{y}\right) = \left(\frac{1}{y} - a\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - b\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - c\right)$.

If this is 0, one of the three factors must be 0, so, for example, if:

$\frac{1}{y} - a = 0$ then:

$\frac{1}{y} = a$, and thus:

$y = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)} = \frac{1}{a}$.

This is because if $c,d \neq 0$ then:

$c = d \iff \frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$.

Remember we decide equality of two fractions by "cross-multiplying":

if $\frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$, this means that $(1)(d) = (c)(1)$, that is $c = d$.

Now there is one thing we need to be careful of: we need to be sure 0 is not a root of $f$.

But $f$ has a non-zero constant term, that is: $f(0) \neq 0$, so we are good.

See if you can do the same thing with your second question, letting $y = x + 1$.

Hi, just a remark,

$f(x) = f\left(\frac{1}{y}\right) = \left(\frac{1}{y} - a\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - b\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - c\right)$.

Then you get (properly),

$\frac{1}{y} - a = 0$
Which becomes

$\frac{1}{y} = a$
Finally,

$y = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)} = \frac{1}{a}$

This proves the zero is at $y = \frac{1}{a}$

We were wondering how it proves the zero is at $x = \frac{1}{a}$??
 
Deveno said:
Suppose that we have:

$f(x) = x^3 - x - 1 = (x - a)(x - b)(x - c) = 0$.

Suppose further, that we let $y = \dfrac{1}{x}$ (assuming that none of $a,b,c$ are 0).

Then $x = \dfrac{1}{y}$ so:

$f(x) = f\left(\frac{1}{y}\right) = \left(\frac{1}{y} - a\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - b\right)\left(\frac{1}{y} - c\right)$.

If this is 0, one of the three factors must be 0, so, for example, if:

$\frac{1}{y} - a = 0$ then:

$\frac{1}{y} = a$, and thus:

$y = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)} = \frac{1}{a}$.

This is because if $c,d \neq 0$ then:

$c = d \iff \frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$.

Remember we decide equality of two fractions by "cross-multiplying":

if $\frac{1}{c} = \frac{1}{d}$, this means that $(1)(d) = (c)(1)$, that is $c = d$.

Now there is one thing we need to be careful of: we need to be sure 0 is not a root of $f$.

But $f$ has a non-zero constant term, that is: $f(0) \neq 0$, so we are good.

See if you can do the same thing with your second question, letting $y = x + 1$.

I reflected upon this, and came up with a new, better idea.

$f(x) = x^3 - x + 1$

$f(\frac{1}{x}) = \frac{1}{x^3} - \frac{1}{x} + 1 = (\frac{1}{x}-a)(\frac{1}{x}-b)(\frac{1}{x}-c)$Considering $a, b, c$ being the roots.

Let's set $f(\frac{1}{x}) = 0$ This would imply,

$(\frac{1}{x}-a)(\frac{1}{x}-b)(\frac{1}{x}-c) = 0$

Which breaks up into three parts,

$(\frac{1}{x}-a) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{a}$
$(\frac{1}{x}-b) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{b}$
$(\frac{1}{x}-c) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{c}$

We have proved that the reciprocal,

$f(x) \implies f(\frac{1}{x})$ has zeros, which are reciprocals themselves, since.

$f(\frac{1}{x}) = \frac{1}{f(x)}$

Thanks! (There is no question involved, I just want to put this out there, if anyone else was confused!)
 
Olok said:
Let's set $f(\frac{1}{x}) = 0$ This would imply,

$(\frac{1}{x}-a)(\frac{1}{x}-b)(\frac{1}{x}-c) = 0$

Which breaks up into three parts,

$(\frac{1}{x}-a) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{a}$
$(\frac{1}{x}-b) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{b}$
$(\frac{1}{x}-c) = 0 \implies x = \frac{1}{c}$

We have proved that the reciprocal,
Up to here it makes sense.

Olok said:
$f(x) \implies f(\frac{1}{x})$ has zeros, which are reciprocals themselves
I would say, $x_0$ is a root of $f(x)$ $\implies$ $1/x_0$ is a root of $f(1/x)$ (provided $x_0\ne0$).

Olok said:
since.

$f(\frac{1}{x}) = \frac{1}{f(x)}$
But this is definitely not true, even for this $f(x)$.

Olok said:
$a, b, c$ are roots of $x^3 - x - 1 = 0$ and therefore,
$\frac{1}{a} , \frac{1}{b}, \frac{1}{c}$ are the roots of $\frac{1}{x^3} - \frac{1}{x} - 1$

...

We're told that $a, b, c$ are the roots of $f(x) = x^3 - x - 1$, hence the function,

$f(x - 1) = (x-1)^3 - (x-1) - 1 = x^3 - 3x^2 + 2x - 1$ has roots $(a+1), (b+1), (c+1)$

Again, what is the mechanism?
In general, suppose that $f(x_0)=y_0$ and let $F(x)=f(g(x))$. Let $x_1=g^{-1}(x_0)$, i.e., $g(x_1)=x_0$, if such $x_1$ exists. Then $F(x_1)=y_0$. Indeed, $F(x_1)=f(g(x_1))=f(x_0)=y_0$. What you are doing in forming $F$ is pre-applying $g$ to the argument before applying $f$. But $x_1$ cancels this because it applies the inverse of $g$ to $x_0$. We have the following chain.
\[
x_0\overset{g^{-1}}{\longmapsto} x_1\mathrel{\overbrace{\overset{g}{\longmapsto} x_0\overset{f}{\longmapsto}}^F} y_0
\]
In Kaliprasad's approach, $g(x)=1/x$ and $x_1=1/x_0$, so that $g(x_1)=x_0$. In anemone's approach, $g(x)=x-1$ and $x_1=x_0+1$, so that $g(x_1)=x_0$.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Up to here it makes sense.

I would say, $x_0$ is a root of $f(x)$ $\implies$ $1/x_0$ is a root of $f(1/x)$ (provided $x_0\ne0$).

But this is definitely not true, even for this $f(x)$.

In general, suppose that $f(x_0)=y_0$ and let $F(x)=f(g(x))$. Let $x_1=g^{-1}(x_0)$, i.e., $g(x_1)=x_0$, if such $x_1$ exists. Then $F(x_1)=y_0$. Indeed, $F(x_1)=f(g(x_1))=f(x_0)=y_0$. What you are doing in forming $F$ is pre-applying $g$ to the argument before applying $f$. But $x_1$ cancels this because it applies the inverse of $g$ to $x_0$. We have the following chain.
\[
x_0\overset{g^{-1}}{\longmapsto} x_1\mathrel{\overbrace{\overset{g}{\longmapsto} x_0\overset{f}{\longmapsto}}^F} y_0
\]
In Kaliprasad's approach, $g(x)=1/x$ and $x_1=1/x_0$, so that $g(x_1)=x_0$. In anemone's approach, $g(x)=x-1$ and $x_1=x_0+1$, so that $g(x_1)=x_0$.

Yeah, just realized, but I hope you knew what I meant.

I did not means

$f(\frac{1}{x}) = \frac{1}{f(x)}$, I meant this for the roots! Sorry =)

We could take a similar approach to anemone's approach.

$f(x) = x^3 - x - 1$

$f(x) = (x - a)(x - b)(x - c) $

$f(x - 1) = (h - a)(h - b)(h - c)$ where $h = x - 1$

Now here we also have three simple equations,

$x = a + 1$
$x = b + 1$
$x = c + 1$

Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K