I don't know where to begin with this question: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6717478/7.png I think it might have something to do with a proof by induction, but I am having trouble setting that up.
Good luck with that
Zarkon....so resourcefull
I can't follow the last 2 lines of the proof could I please have a little explanation?
If I remember correctly, this was the reasoning I was presented with some time ago. Since all the coefficients are real, if you have one complex root, you need to be able to multiply it by another complex root to balance it out. The conjugate is what does this for you. I learned this a while ago, and it may be incorrect, but it seems to make sense.
what are you balancing out?
if there was only one complex root, you would be forced to have a complex coefficient. Also, if you multiply all the complex roots together, they must be real.
but it says that c is a root of f(x) in the proposition so it doesn't need to be multiplied by the conjugate right?
but c is in the complex. So to ensure that all the coefficients are real, we have to multiply c by its conjugate.
from what I can tell in the proof they are just taking the conjugate of the complex term then they say that it ends up being the conjugate of 0, which is 0
ok how about this if c is a complex root of f(x) then the sum of all the terms of the polynomial = 0 (3rd line of that proof) take the conjugate of both sides by the properties of the conjugate you know that the conjugate of the sum will be the sum of the individual conjugates. and the conjugate of 0 is 0 so then the sum of all the terms of the polynomial = 0 also when using the conjugate which tells us that if c is a complex root of f(x), then so is the conjugate of c
From what I can tell, in the second to last line of that proof, they first say that that conjugate of (z+w) is the conjugate of z plus the conjugate of w, then that the conjugate of zw is the conjugate of z times the conjugate of w, then that the conjugate of z^n is the (conjugate of z)^n. Finally, that's just the original equation with the conjugate instead of the root. Since they both equal 0, they must both be roots.
basically what you just said.
alright I think this is making sense now. It's simpler then I thought it would be actually. But, maybe I'm just doing something wrong.
I don't even know what they are trying to prove there
number 14, top of page 13 they have a short proof for the CJRT that's very similar to what you described.
oh yeah that is actually really helpful, thank you
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!