Waste less time on Facebook — follow Brilliant.
For a given polynomial of degree \(n\) with roots \( r_1, r_2, \ldots r_n \), let \(s_k \) be the kth symmetric sum and \(p_k = \sum_{i=1}^n r_i ^k \) is the kth power sum
Claim: If \(s_1=s_2=s_3=...=s_k=0\),then \(p_1=p_2=p_3=.,..=p_k=0\). where
Proof: By induction on \(k \). Base case: Since \( s_1 = p_1 \), hence if \( s_1 = 0 \) then \( p_1 = 0 \).
Induction step: Suppose that for some \(j\), we know that \( p_1, p_2, \ldots p_j = 0 \). Then, by newtons sum, we have
\[p_k=s_1p_{k-1}-s_2p_{k-2}+....+(-1)^{k-1}s_{k-2}p_2+(-1)^{k}s_{k-1}p_1+(-1)^{k+1}ks_k = 0 + 0 + \ldots + 0. \]
Note by
Aareyan Manzoor
1 year, 10 months ago
Comments
Sort by:
Top Newest@Aareyan Manzoor Great note! I've cleaned it up so that it's much easier to understand what you are saying.
Presenting it via a proof by induction isn't necessary, but helps build the idea that all we need to show \( p_j = 0 \) is up to \( s_j = 0 \).
By improving the format of your presentation, you make it immediately clear what you want to show, and why it's interesting.
Log in to reply
thank you sir!
Log in to reply
There's no need to apply Newton's Sum.
If \(s_1 = s_2 = \cdots = s_k = 0 \), then the roots satisfy the equation, \(x^k = 0 \). So all its roots are 0, then by definition, \(p_1 = p_2 = \cdots = p_k = 0 \).
Log in to reply
what about \[x^{100}-x^2+x+1=0\] i meant for that
Log in to reply
I don't follow. What about that polynomial?
Log in to reply
look at this
Log in to reply
That one only applies for \(s_1 = s_2 = \ldots = s_{98}= 0 \). And \(s_{99} = -99 \ne 0 \).
Log in to reply
i meant that see, both variables are "n".
Log in to reply
I don't understand what you're saying.
Log in to reply
i gave wrong variables in note, just realized now. edited
Log in to reply
nice way....
Log in to reply