4
$\begingroup$

Faulhaber polynomial of order $p \in \Bbb{N}$ is defined as the unique polynomial of degree $p+1$ satisfying

$$ S_{p}(n) = \sum_{k=1}^{n} k^p $$

for $n = 1, 2, 3, \cdots$. For example,

\begin{align*} S_0(x) &= x, \\ S_1(x) &= \frac{x(x+1)}{2}, \\ S_2(x) &= \frac{x(x+1)(2x+1)}{6}, \\ S_3(x) &= \frac{x^2 (x+1)^2}{4}.\\ S_{4}(x)&=\dfrac{x(x+1)(2x+1)(3x^2+3x-1)}{30}\\ S_{5}(x)&=\dfrac{x^2(x+1)^2(2x^2+2x-1)}{12}\\ S_{6}(x)&=\dfrac{x(x+1)(2x+1)(3x^4+6x^3-3x+1)}{42}\\ S_{7}(x)&=\dfrac{x^2(x+1)^2(3x^4+6x^3-x^2-4x+2)}{24}\\ \end{align*} if define $n\in R$,so I conjecture $$S_{k}(x)=0$$ have only rational roots $0,-\frac{1}{2},-1$

In addition, further discovery

when $2|k$,

$f_{k}(x)=0$ have only rational root $0,-\frac{1}{2},-1$

when $2\nmid k,\ge 3$,

$f_{k}(x)=0$ have only rational root $0,-1$(Double Root)

This is Old Results? Thanks

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ To investigate known results, look for "Bernoulli polynomial". If $B_k(x)$ is the Bernoulli poynomial of degree $k$, then $S_{k-1}(x) = (-1)^{k}B_{k}(-x)/k$ except for the constant term . $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 13, 2023 at 12:23
  • $\begingroup$ Something looks wrong with $S_7$: the top coefficient should be $1/8$, whereas you have $3/90$. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 13, 2023 at 15:05

1 Answer 1

5
+25
$\begingroup$

This is a probably known consequence of the von Staudt-Clausen theorem. From the exponential generating function $$G(x,t)~=~ \sum S_p(x) \frac{t^p}{p!} ~=~ e^t\,\frac{1-e^{x\,t}}{1-e^t}$$ of the polynomials $S_p(x)$ it follows that a rational zero $x_0=m/n$ with $n\geq 1$ and $\gcd (n,m)=1$ leads to a zero coefficient of the series $G(x_0,t)$, and accordingly of $$-G(\frac{m}{n},-n\,t) ~=~ \frac{1-e^{-m\,t}}{1-e^{ n\,t}}. $$ Evidently there are zero coefficients if $m=0$, $(m,n)=(-1,1),(-1,2)$, corresponding to the factors $x$, $x+1$, and $2\,x +1$, whereby the latter arise from the vanishing nonlinear odd terms in the expansion of $$f(t)~=~\frac{1 }{1+e^{ t}} ~~{\rm due~to}~~f'(t)~=~-f'(-t). $$ From the exponential generating function for the Bernoulli numbers $B_k=B_k^-$ one has $$ - \frac{n\,t}{1-e^{ n\,t}} ~=~ \sum \limits_{k=0}^\infty \frac{B_k \,n^k\,t^k}{k!}~=~T\,e^{n\,b\,t}, $$ where $T$ is the linear umbral operator with $T b^k ~:=~ B_k$. $$n\,G(\frac{-m}{n},-n\,t) ~=~T\, \frac{e^{(m+n\,b)\,t}-e^{n\,b\,t}}{ t}\,~=~T\, \sum \limits_{k=1}^\infty \left( (m+n\,b)^k -(n\,b)^k\right)\frac{t^{k-1}}{k!}. $$ This gives the condition for a rational root $-m/n$, that there is a $k>1$,such that $$ T\,(m+n\,b)^k ~=~ \sum \limits_{\ell =0 }^k {k \choose \ell} m^{k-\ell}\,n^\ell\,B_\ell ~=~ n ^k B_k,$$ or equivalently for $k>2$ $$0~=~ \sum \limits_{\ell =0 }^{k-1} {k \choose \ell} \left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^{k-\ell} \,B_\ell ~=~ \left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^k-\frac{k}{2}\,\left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^{k-1} \,+ \sum \limits_{\ell =1 }^{\lfloor \frac{k-1}{2} \rfloor} {k \choose 2\,\ell} \left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^{k-2\ell} \,B_{2\,\ell} .$$ From the von Staudt-Clausen theorem it follows that the denominator of $B_{2\,\ell}$ is square free and equals the product of all primes $p$ for which $p-1 | 2\ell$, such that for the $p$-adic norm $|B_{2\,\ell}|_p\leq p$, and either $|B_{2\,\ell}|_p=1$ or $|B_{2\,\ell-2}|_p=1$ for $p>3$. Because the first polynomials $S_k(x)$ have no rational roots besides 0,-1,-1/2 it is also assumed that e.g. $k>5$. Now for primes $p\geq2$ the following cases cover the remaining possibilities for $(n,m)=1$: (1) $n>2$ ~(2) $n\leq2$ and $m>n$,~(3) $m=-1,~n=2$.

Case 1: In this case there is a prime $p>2$ with $v_p(n)=s\geq 1$, or $p=2$ and $s>1$. For the terms $$A_\ell ~=~{k \choose \ell} \left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^{k-\ell} \,B_\ell $$ in the right sum one then has for $\ell>0$: $$\left|A_0 \right|_p ~=~ p^{s\,k}, ~~~\left|A_{2\ell} \right|_p \leq p^{s(k-2\ell)+1}, ~~~\left|A_{2\ell} \right|_p~\leq~\left|A_1 \right|_p <\left|A_0 \right|_p.$$ It follows that $$~\left| \sum \limits_{\ell =1 }^{k-1} A_\ell \right|_p ~\leq~\left|A_1 \right|_p <\left|A_0 \right|_p,$$ and therefore $$~\left| \sum \limits_{\ell =0 }^{k-1} A_\ell \right|_p ~=~ p^{sk} \neq 0.$$ It is thus impossible that $n$ is any integer other than 1 or 2.

Case 2: In this case there is a prime $p>n$ with $v_p(m)=s\geq 1$, and division by $m^k$ gives the equation $$0~=~ \sum \limits_{\ell =0 }^{k-1} {k \choose \ell} \left(\frac{1}{n}\right)^{k-\ell} \,\frac{B_\ell}{m^\ell}.$$ By now setting $$A_\ell ~=~{k \choose \ell} \left(\frac{1}{n}\right)^{k-\ell} \,\frac{B_\ell}{m^\ell}, $$ one obtains analogous to case 1 that with $\ell<L=\lfloor (k-1)/2\rfloor$ $$\left|A_{2\,L} \right|_p ~\geq~ p^{2\,s\,L}, ~~~\left|A_{2\ell} \right|_p \leq p^{2\,s\,\ell+1}< \left|A_{2\ell} \right|_p,$$ such that $$~\left| \sum \limits_{\ell =0 }^{k-1} A_\ell \right|_p \geq~ p^{2\,s\,L} > 0.$$ This excludes also solutions $x_0=-m/n$ for $n\leq2,~m>n$. The last remaining case of $x_0=1/2$ is left as exercise for the reader.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .