One of zeros of convex combination of polynomials goes to infinity?
$begingroup$
Suppose we have two polynomials of degree $n$ and $n-1$,
begin{align*}
f(x) &= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + dots + a_0, \
g(x) &= b_{n-1}x^{n-1} + b_{n-2} x^{n-2} + dots + b_0,
end{align*}
with $a_{n} neq 0$ and $b_{n-1} neq 0$. Let us consider the convex combination of the two polynomials $h(x,t) = (1-t) f(x) + t g(x)$. I read a statement that says: as $t to 1$, one of the zeros $h(x,t)$ would go to infinity. Intuitively, I think this is true because by Vieta's formula, as $t to 1$, the coefficient with $x^n$ would go to $0$ and it must be that one of the root should be unbounded. How do we argue this point?
linear-algebra complex-analysis polynomials
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose we have two polynomials of degree $n$ and $n-1$,
begin{align*}
f(x) &= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + dots + a_0, \
g(x) &= b_{n-1}x^{n-1} + b_{n-2} x^{n-2} + dots + b_0,
end{align*}
with $a_{n} neq 0$ and $b_{n-1} neq 0$. Let us consider the convex combination of the two polynomials $h(x,t) = (1-t) f(x) + t g(x)$. I read a statement that says: as $t to 1$, one of the zeros $h(x,t)$ would go to infinity. Intuitively, I think this is true because by Vieta's formula, as $t to 1$, the coefficient with $x^n$ would go to $0$ and it must be that one of the root should be unbounded. How do we argue this point?
linear-algebra complex-analysis polynomials
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose we have two polynomials of degree $n$ and $n-1$,
begin{align*}
f(x) &= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + dots + a_0, \
g(x) &= b_{n-1}x^{n-1} + b_{n-2} x^{n-2} + dots + b_0,
end{align*}
with $a_{n} neq 0$ and $b_{n-1} neq 0$. Let us consider the convex combination of the two polynomials $h(x,t) = (1-t) f(x) + t g(x)$. I read a statement that says: as $t to 1$, one of the zeros $h(x,t)$ would go to infinity. Intuitively, I think this is true because by Vieta's formula, as $t to 1$, the coefficient with $x^n$ would go to $0$ and it must be that one of the root should be unbounded. How do we argue this point?
linear-algebra complex-analysis polynomials
$endgroup$
Suppose we have two polynomials of degree $n$ and $n-1$,
begin{align*}
f(x) &= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + dots + a_0, \
g(x) &= b_{n-1}x^{n-1} + b_{n-2} x^{n-2} + dots + b_0,
end{align*}
with $a_{n} neq 0$ and $b_{n-1} neq 0$. Let us consider the convex combination of the two polynomials $h(x,t) = (1-t) f(x) + t g(x)$. I read a statement that says: as $t to 1$, one of the zeros $h(x,t)$ would go to infinity. Intuitively, I think this is true because by Vieta's formula, as $t to 1$, the coefficient with $x^n$ would go to $0$ and it must be that one of the root should be unbounded. How do we argue this point?
linear-algebra complex-analysis polynomials
linear-algebra complex-analysis polynomials
asked Dec 19 '18 at 6:27
user1101010user1101010
9011830
9011830
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It is a consequence of Rouche's theorem. We can prove that for all sufficiently large $R>0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that for each $t$ with $0<|t|<delta$, there exists unique $z=z(t)$ such that
$$
|z|geq R, ;tf(z) + (1-t)g(z) =0.
$$ Without loss of generality, let $$
R>max{|lambda_1|,| lambda_2|,ldots, |lambda_{n-1}|},$$
where $lambda_1, lambda_2,ldots, lambda_{n-1}$ are roots of $g(lambda)=0$ (counted with multiplicity.) And let $h_t(z)= g(z) +t(f(z)-g(z)).$ Now, consider
$$
N:tmapsto frac{1}{2pi i}int_{|z|=R} frac{h_t'(z)}{h_t(z)}dz.
$$ If $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, then $N$ gives us the number of roots of $h_t=0$ in the region $|z|<R$ by Cauchy's argument principle. Note that if
$$
|t|<delta:=frac{min_{|z|=R} |g(z)|}{max_{|z|=R}|f(z)-g(z)|} leq min_{|z|=R}frac{|g(z)|}{|f(z)-g(z)|},
$$ then $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, and $N:tin (-delta,delta)to mathbb{N}cup {0}$ defines a continuous integer-valued function. Since it holds that $N(0)= n-1$ by the choice of $R$, we have $$N equiv n-1$$ on $|t|<delta$. Note that if $tneq 0$, then by fundamental theorem of algebra, $h_t$ has $n$-roots counted with multiplicity. This implies that for all $0<|t|<delta$, there exists exactly one root $z_t in mathbb{C}setminus mathbb{D}(0,R)$ of $h_t(z)=0$ as desired.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the reverse polynomials
begin{align}
tilde h(w,t)&=w^nh(w^{-1},t)=(1−t)x^nf(w^{-1})+tx^ng(w^{-1})\
&=
begin{array}{lll}
&(1−t)&(a_n+&a_{n-1}w+...+a_1w^{n-1}+a_0w^n)\
+&t~&(&b_{n-1}w+...+b_1w^{n-1}+b_0w^n)
end{array}
\
&=(1-t)tilde f(w)+twtilde g(w)
end{align}
Then one easily sees that $tilde h(w,t)$ has always $n$ roots $w$. These correspond to the roots of $h(t,x)$ via $x=w^{-1}$ for $t<1$. At time $t=1$ the polynomial $tilde h(w,1)=wtilde g(w)$ has $w=0$ and the inverses of the roots of $g$ as roots. The set of roots of $tilde h$ is a continuous function of $t$. As $tilde h$ has a continuous path $w_0(t)$, $tin [a,1]$ of roots converging to $0$, the original homotopy $h$ has a path $x_0(t)=w_0(t)^{-1}$, $tin [a,1)$, of roots that diverges to infinity.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3046072%2fone-of-zeros-of-convex-combination-of-polynomials-goes-to-infinity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It is a consequence of Rouche's theorem. We can prove that for all sufficiently large $R>0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that for each $t$ with $0<|t|<delta$, there exists unique $z=z(t)$ such that
$$
|z|geq R, ;tf(z) + (1-t)g(z) =0.
$$ Without loss of generality, let $$
R>max{|lambda_1|,| lambda_2|,ldots, |lambda_{n-1}|},$$
where $lambda_1, lambda_2,ldots, lambda_{n-1}$ are roots of $g(lambda)=0$ (counted with multiplicity.) And let $h_t(z)= g(z) +t(f(z)-g(z)).$ Now, consider
$$
N:tmapsto frac{1}{2pi i}int_{|z|=R} frac{h_t'(z)}{h_t(z)}dz.
$$ If $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, then $N$ gives us the number of roots of $h_t=0$ in the region $|z|<R$ by Cauchy's argument principle. Note that if
$$
|t|<delta:=frac{min_{|z|=R} |g(z)|}{max_{|z|=R}|f(z)-g(z)|} leq min_{|z|=R}frac{|g(z)|}{|f(z)-g(z)|},
$$ then $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, and $N:tin (-delta,delta)to mathbb{N}cup {0}$ defines a continuous integer-valued function. Since it holds that $N(0)= n-1$ by the choice of $R$, we have $$N equiv n-1$$ on $|t|<delta$. Note that if $tneq 0$, then by fundamental theorem of algebra, $h_t$ has $n$-roots counted with multiplicity. This implies that for all $0<|t|<delta$, there exists exactly one root $z_t in mathbb{C}setminus mathbb{D}(0,R)$ of $h_t(z)=0$ as desired.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is a consequence of Rouche's theorem. We can prove that for all sufficiently large $R>0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that for each $t$ with $0<|t|<delta$, there exists unique $z=z(t)$ such that
$$
|z|geq R, ;tf(z) + (1-t)g(z) =0.
$$ Without loss of generality, let $$
R>max{|lambda_1|,| lambda_2|,ldots, |lambda_{n-1}|},$$
where $lambda_1, lambda_2,ldots, lambda_{n-1}$ are roots of $g(lambda)=0$ (counted with multiplicity.) And let $h_t(z)= g(z) +t(f(z)-g(z)).$ Now, consider
$$
N:tmapsto frac{1}{2pi i}int_{|z|=R} frac{h_t'(z)}{h_t(z)}dz.
$$ If $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, then $N$ gives us the number of roots of $h_t=0$ in the region $|z|<R$ by Cauchy's argument principle. Note that if
$$
|t|<delta:=frac{min_{|z|=R} |g(z)|}{max_{|z|=R}|f(z)-g(z)|} leq min_{|z|=R}frac{|g(z)|}{|f(z)-g(z)|},
$$ then $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, and $N:tin (-delta,delta)to mathbb{N}cup {0}$ defines a continuous integer-valued function. Since it holds that $N(0)= n-1$ by the choice of $R$, we have $$N equiv n-1$$ on $|t|<delta$. Note that if $tneq 0$, then by fundamental theorem of algebra, $h_t$ has $n$-roots counted with multiplicity. This implies that for all $0<|t|<delta$, there exists exactly one root $z_t in mathbb{C}setminus mathbb{D}(0,R)$ of $h_t(z)=0$ as desired.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is a consequence of Rouche's theorem. We can prove that for all sufficiently large $R>0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that for each $t$ with $0<|t|<delta$, there exists unique $z=z(t)$ such that
$$
|z|geq R, ;tf(z) + (1-t)g(z) =0.
$$ Without loss of generality, let $$
R>max{|lambda_1|,| lambda_2|,ldots, |lambda_{n-1}|},$$
where $lambda_1, lambda_2,ldots, lambda_{n-1}$ are roots of $g(lambda)=0$ (counted with multiplicity.) And let $h_t(z)= g(z) +t(f(z)-g(z)).$ Now, consider
$$
N:tmapsto frac{1}{2pi i}int_{|z|=R} frac{h_t'(z)}{h_t(z)}dz.
$$ If $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, then $N$ gives us the number of roots of $h_t=0$ in the region $|z|<R$ by Cauchy's argument principle. Note that if
$$
|t|<delta:=frac{min_{|z|=R} |g(z)|}{max_{|z|=R}|f(z)-g(z)|} leq min_{|z|=R}frac{|g(z)|}{|f(z)-g(z)|},
$$ then $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, and $N:tin (-delta,delta)to mathbb{N}cup {0}$ defines a continuous integer-valued function. Since it holds that $N(0)= n-1$ by the choice of $R$, we have $$N equiv n-1$$ on $|t|<delta$. Note that if $tneq 0$, then by fundamental theorem of algebra, $h_t$ has $n$-roots counted with multiplicity. This implies that for all $0<|t|<delta$, there exists exactly one root $z_t in mathbb{C}setminus mathbb{D}(0,R)$ of $h_t(z)=0$ as desired.
$endgroup$
It is a consequence of Rouche's theorem. We can prove that for all sufficiently large $R>0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that for each $t$ with $0<|t|<delta$, there exists unique $z=z(t)$ such that
$$
|z|geq R, ;tf(z) + (1-t)g(z) =0.
$$ Without loss of generality, let $$
R>max{|lambda_1|,| lambda_2|,ldots, |lambda_{n-1}|},$$
where $lambda_1, lambda_2,ldots, lambda_{n-1}$ are roots of $g(lambda)=0$ (counted with multiplicity.) And let $h_t(z)= g(z) +t(f(z)-g(z)).$ Now, consider
$$
N:tmapsto frac{1}{2pi i}int_{|z|=R} frac{h_t'(z)}{h_t(z)}dz.
$$ If $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, then $N$ gives us the number of roots of $h_t=0$ in the region $|z|<R$ by Cauchy's argument principle. Note that if
$$
|t|<delta:=frac{min_{|z|=R} |g(z)|}{max_{|z|=R}|f(z)-g(z)|} leq min_{|z|=R}frac{|g(z)|}{|f(z)-g(z)|},
$$ then $h_t$ does not vanish on $|z|=R$, and $N:tin (-delta,delta)to mathbb{N}cup {0}$ defines a continuous integer-valued function. Since it holds that $N(0)= n-1$ by the choice of $R$, we have $$N equiv n-1$$ on $|t|<delta$. Note that if $tneq 0$, then by fundamental theorem of algebra, $h_t$ has $n$-roots counted with multiplicity. This implies that for all $0<|t|<delta$, there exists exactly one root $z_t in mathbb{C}setminus mathbb{D}(0,R)$ of $h_t(z)=0$ as desired.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 7:01
SongSong
18.5k21651
18.5k21651
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the reverse polynomials
begin{align}
tilde h(w,t)&=w^nh(w^{-1},t)=(1−t)x^nf(w^{-1})+tx^ng(w^{-1})\
&=
begin{array}{lll}
&(1−t)&(a_n+&a_{n-1}w+...+a_1w^{n-1}+a_0w^n)\
+&t~&(&b_{n-1}w+...+b_1w^{n-1}+b_0w^n)
end{array}
\
&=(1-t)tilde f(w)+twtilde g(w)
end{align}
Then one easily sees that $tilde h(w,t)$ has always $n$ roots $w$. These correspond to the roots of $h(t,x)$ via $x=w^{-1}$ for $t<1$. At time $t=1$ the polynomial $tilde h(w,1)=wtilde g(w)$ has $w=0$ and the inverses of the roots of $g$ as roots. The set of roots of $tilde h$ is a continuous function of $t$. As $tilde h$ has a continuous path $w_0(t)$, $tin [a,1]$ of roots converging to $0$, the original homotopy $h$ has a path $x_0(t)=w_0(t)^{-1}$, $tin [a,1)$, of roots that diverges to infinity.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the reverse polynomials
begin{align}
tilde h(w,t)&=w^nh(w^{-1},t)=(1−t)x^nf(w^{-1})+tx^ng(w^{-1})\
&=
begin{array}{lll}
&(1−t)&(a_n+&a_{n-1}w+...+a_1w^{n-1}+a_0w^n)\
+&t~&(&b_{n-1}w+...+b_1w^{n-1}+b_0w^n)
end{array}
\
&=(1-t)tilde f(w)+twtilde g(w)
end{align}
Then one easily sees that $tilde h(w,t)$ has always $n$ roots $w$. These correspond to the roots of $h(t,x)$ via $x=w^{-1}$ for $t<1$. At time $t=1$ the polynomial $tilde h(w,1)=wtilde g(w)$ has $w=0$ and the inverses of the roots of $g$ as roots. The set of roots of $tilde h$ is a continuous function of $t$. As $tilde h$ has a continuous path $w_0(t)$, $tin [a,1]$ of roots converging to $0$, the original homotopy $h$ has a path $x_0(t)=w_0(t)^{-1}$, $tin [a,1)$, of roots that diverges to infinity.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the reverse polynomials
begin{align}
tilde h(w,t)&=w^nh(w^{-1},t)=(1−t)x^nf(w^{-1})+tx^ng(w^{-1})\
&=
begin{array}{lll}
&(1−t)&(a_n+&a_{n-1}w+...+a_1w^{n-1}+a_0w^n)\
+&t~&(&b_{n-1}w+...+b_1w^{n-1}+b_0w^n)
end{array}
\
&=(1-t)tilde f(w)+twtilde g(w)
end{align}
Then one easily sees that $tilde h(w,t)$ has always $n$ roots $w$. These correspond to the roots of $h(t,x)$ via $x=w^{-1}$ for $t<1$. At time $t=1$ the polynomial $tilde h(w,1)=wtilde g(w)$ has $w=0$ and the inverses of the roots of $g$ as roots. The set of roots of $tilde h$ is a continuous function of $t$. As $tilde h$ has a continuous path $w_0(t)$, $tin [a,1]$ of roots converging to $0$, the original homotopy $h$ has a path $x_0(t)=w_0(t)^{-1}$, $tin [a,1)$, of roots that diverges to infinity.
$endgroup$
Consider the reverse polynomials
begin{align}
tilde h(w,t)&=w^nh(w^{-1},t)=(1−t)x^nf(w^{-1})+tx^ng(w^{-1})\
&=
begin{array}{lll}
&(1−t)&(a_n+&a_{n-1}w+...+a_1w^{n-1}+a_0w^n)\
+&t~&(&b_{n-1}w+...+b_1w^{n-1}+b_0w^n)
end{array}
\
&=(1-t)tilde f(w)+twtilde g(w)
end{align}
Then one easily sees that $tilde h(w,t)$ has always $n$ roots $w$. These correspond to the roots of $h(t,x)$ via $x=w^{-1}$ for $t<1$. At time $t=1$ the polynomial $tilde h(w,1)=wtilde g(w)$ has $w=0$ and the inverses of the roots of $g$ as roots. The set of roots of $tilde h$ is a continuous function of $t$. As $tilde h$ has a continuous path $w_0(t)$, $tin [a,1]$ of roots converging to $0$, the original homotopy $h$ has a path $x_0(t)=w_0(t)^{-1}$, $tin [a,1)$, of roots that diverges to infinity.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 9:31
LutzLLutzL
60.1k42057
60.1k42057
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3046072%2fone-of-zeros-of-convex-combination-of-polynomials-goes-to-infinity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown