Timeline for Positive roots of a polynomial
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 4, 2015 at 12:59 | vote | accept | dima | ||
May 4, 2015 at 12:30 | answer | added | Max Alekseyev | timeline score: 21 | |
May 4, 2015 at 4:25 | comment | added | Suvrit | For $n=3$ and also for $n=4$ it seems there is just one change of sign in the consecutive terms, so Descartes' rule of signs should kick in and yield at most one positive root. Perhaps one can even inductively show that there is just one change of sign, and a small additional argument shows that there is at least one positive root. | |
May 3, 2015 at 20:07 | comment | added | Douglas Zare | If you divide by $\prod (x+a_k)^2$, you can replace the product with the reciprocal of the omitted term, $(x+a_i)^{-2}$. | |
May 3, 2015 at 19:51 | comment | added | dima | @Greg Martin: $n=1$ does not satisfy the condition that not all $a_i$'s are equal. For $n=2$ we get $p(x)=\frac{1}{2} \left(a_1-a_2\right){}^2 x^2-\frac{1}{2} a_1 \left(a_1-a_2\right){}^2 a_2$ and so clearly the only positive root is $x_0=\sqrt{a_1 a_2}$. For $n=3$ I don't know already... | |
May 3, 2015 at 19:21 | comment | added | Greg Martin | Can you prove it for $n=1$, $n=2$, $n=3$? | |
May 3, 2015 at 9:00 | history | edited | dima | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 55 characters in body
|
May 3, 2015 at 8:59 | comment | added | dima | @Seva some numerical evidence, I'll add this to the question | |
May 3, 2015 at 8:58 | comment | added | Seva | What makes you tho expect that it has exactly one positive root? | |
May 3, 2015 at 8:23 | history | asked | dima | CC BY-SA 3.0 |