How many real roots does the polynomial
P ( x ) = x 4 + 2 x 2 − x + 1
have?
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Did'nt understood
Log in to reply
I'm sorry if my solution isn't clear enough.
What are the parts that you're having trouble understanding?
Since my solution is about 5 sentences long, you could point out the sentences you've problems with and I will be happy to help.
Log in to reply
can you show graphically , if P(x)>0 , then its roots will be imaginary?
If the polynomial is -
a x 2 + b x + c > k
a x 2 + b x + c − k > 0 , what can you say about the vertex of the parabola(I mean what can we say about a , a>0 or a<0)
what about third degree , fourth degree.......?
Log in to reply
@U Z – The roots of a polynomial, P ( x ) , are the values of x for which P ( x ) is equal to zero.
If a polynomial function P ( x ) is greater than zero for all real x , it means there is no real x such that P ( x ) = 0 . In other words, P ( x ) has no real solution.
Log in to reply
@Mursalin Habib – Sir I know about what are polynomial roots thanks , very smart approach +1 , sorry to disturb you , my mind always works slow(late to understand).
What can we say about the vertex of the parabola (this I am not getting right now, I mean to say it will show a minimum or a maximum?)
@Mursalin Habib – Sorry to deviate from the topic , yesterday in a discussion on G.P with Sandeep Bhardwaj Sir , I consider 1,1,1,1,... as not a G.P , but sir considers. why? Can you help me
My doubt - how can we geometrically interpret it? , If we can say it a G.P , so why not consider it as A.P or H.P?
Log in to reply
@U Z – Technically, it is a geometric progression since the ratio of consecutive terms is constant. It's not an "interesting" geometric progression that's for sure. We call this a constant geometric progression because its terms do not change.
It is also an arithmetic progression because the difference between consecutive terms is constant .
Does that help?
Beautiful.
Just graph it.
Log in to reply
Won't that be quite crude for a problem this beautiful....
Log in to reply
Just........ Dont pay attention to what my 2 years younger self has said.He knew almost nothing at that point.
Log in to reply
@Abdur Rehman Zahid – HAHA. That was quite a joke.
Truly Majestic! :)
P ( x ) = x 4 + 2 x 2 − x + 1 = x 4 + 2 ( x − 4 1 ) 2 + 8 7 > 0 for all x , so no real roots.
Pretty solution :)
Did it the same way sir !!
Note that P ( x ) = ( x 2 + 1 ) 2 − x . Thus, if we prove that ( x 2 + 1 ) 2 − x ≥ 0 ⟺ ( x 2 + 1 ) 2 ≥ x then there are no real roots.
If x < 0 , then this is trivial because the L H S is positive and the R H S is negative.
If x ≥ 0 , then we can take the square root and get x 2 + 1 ≥ x
Note that ( x − 2 1 ) 2 ≥ 0 ⟺ x 2 − x + 4 1 ≥ 0 ⟺ x 2 + 1 ≥ x + 4 3
Also, ( x − 2 1 ) 2 ≥ 0 ⟺ x − x + 4 1 ≥ 0 ⟺ x + 4 1 ≥ x
Putting these two inequalities together, we get x 2 + 1 ≥ x + 4 3 > x + 4 1 ≥ x so ( x 2 + 1 ) 2 > x so there are 0 real solutions to the original polynomial.
I think you over-thought it a little bit. It's pretty much obvious that the expression is greater than zero for all real x .
Log in to reply
Yes but sometimes 'obvious' is not the math way
I knew there was probably an easier way, but I thought the way I did was pretty cute, so I posted it.
How did u prove that x²+1≥√x. I mean, how did u think about constructing the two inequalities afterwards. Can u throw some light on why u took (x-1/2)² and (√x-1/2)² to prove the inequality? Is there a procedure kind of thing or is it just mere observation that I'm failing to see in the inequality?
P ( x ) = ( x 2 + 1 ) 2 − x > 0 for all x < 0 . For x > 0 , f ′ ( x ) > 0 , f ( 0 ) > 0 so no real solution.
P ( x ) = x 4 + x 2 + ( x − 2 1 ) 2 + 4 3 > 0 since all first three terms ≥ 0 .
P ( x ) = x 4 + 2 ( x − 4 1 ) 2 + 8 7
We have x 4 > 0 and 2 ( x − 4 1 ) 2 > 0 for all real x, hence P ( x ) > 0 for all real x.
Thus P ( x ) has no real root.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We claim that P ( x ) > 0 for all real x .
If x ≤ 0 , then it's obvious that P ( x ) > 0 .
If x ≥ 1 , then x 4 − x ≥ 0 . It immediately follows that P ( x ) > 0 .
If 0 < x < 1 , then − x + 1 > 0 and that implies that P ( x ) > 0 .
This proves our claim. □
And we can say that P ( x ) has 0 real roots.