This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
@David Mcmillan
–
O.k., thanks for the update. However, the fact that p(2)=0 won't imply that p(−2)=0 either. On the other hand, if p(x) has integer coefficients then p(2)=0⇔p(−2)=0. This comes as a result of the irrational conjugate roots theorem, which states that for any polynomial p(x) with rational coefficients, if a+bc is a root of p(x), where a,b are rational and c is irrational, then a−bc must also be a root of p(x).
To save some time, I'm just going to give you a link to a proof of the general theorem, (which was surprisingly hard to find). Scroll down to theorem 16 on page 14 for the desired proof. You can adapt this proof for the special case a=0,b=1 to simplify it a bit. Good question; I don't think I've ever come across a proof of this theorem before. :)
This is the basic property of a polynomial equation. In fact, this is true for all rational coefficients. You try to prove it by taking a quadratic equation and then try to generalize that.
Do you mean that if p(2)=0 then p(−2)=0? If so, then this is not the case. If p(x)=x2−x−2 then p(2)=0 but p(−2)=4. Perhaps you meant something else with the terminology "( -2 ) = 0"?
What can be said is that if a complex number z is a root of a polynomial then so is its conjugate zˉ, i.e., p(z)=0⇔p(zˉ)=0.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
david mcmillan see this
Same thing Sandeep Bhardwaj said
Log in to reply
But p(2)=0 doesn't imply that p(−2)=0. How else should I be reading "p(2) then (−2)=0" ?
Log in to reply
Sir he meant - p(2)
Sorry for the typo. I meant p(−2)
Log in to reply
p(2)=0 won't imply that p(−2)=0 either. On the other hand, if p(x) has integer coefficients then p(2)=0⇔p(−2)=0. This comes as a result of the irrational conjugate roots theorem, which states that for any polynomial p(x) with rational coefficients, if a+bc is a root of p(x), where a,b are rational and c is irrational, then a−bc must also be a root of p(x).
O.k., thanks for the update. However, the fact thatTo save some time, I'm just going to give you a link to a proof of the general theorem, (which was surprisingly hard to find). Scroll down to theorem 16 on page 14 for the desired proof. You can adapt this proof for the special case a=0,b=1 to simplify it a bit. Good question; I don't think I've ever come across a proof of this theorem before. :)
@Calvin Lin @brian charlesworth @Sreejato Bhattacharya Please help.
Log in to reply
@Sudeep Salgia @Sandeep Bhardwaj Also try and help
Log in to reply
This is the basic property of a polynomial equation. In fact, this is true for all rational coefficients. You try to prove it by taking a quadratic equation and then try to generalize that.
Do you mean that if p(2)=0 then p(−2)=0? If so, then this is not the case. If p(x)=x2−x−2 then p(2)=0 but p(−2)=4. Perhaps you meant something else with the terminology "( -2 ) = 0"?
What can be said is that if a complex number z is a root of a polynomial then so is its conjugate zˉ, i.e., p(z)=0⇔p(zˉ)=0.