One of zeros of convex combination of polynomials goes to infinity?












1












$begingroup$


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?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    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?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      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?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      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






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 19 '18 at 6:27









      user1101010user1101010

      9011830




      9011830






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          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.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            1












            $begingroup$

            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$














              Your Answer





              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
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              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









              2












              $begingroup$

              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.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                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.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  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.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  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.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 19 '18 at 7:01









                  SongSong

                  18.5k21651




                  18.5k21651























                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      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.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        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.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          1












                          1








                          1





                          $begingroup$

                          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.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          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.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Dec 20 '18 at 9:31









                          LutzLLutzL

                          60.1k42057




                          60.1k42057






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              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





















































                              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







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Plaza Victoria

                              In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                              How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...