Mathematics desk
< December 8	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 10 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 9

Sum of Roots of Polynomial

Hello. How can I prove that the sum of all roots (real and complex) of a polynomial is $-{\frac {b}{a}}$ where a is the leading coefficient and b is the coefficient of the variable of second highest degree? Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not true, consider x³-1. It is true if you count all roots, including complex, which can be seen by factoring the polynomial.--RDBury (talk) 02:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct. Please pardon me. I've rephrased my question. --Mayfare (talk) 05:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For linear problems, this is self-evident. For quadratics, it can be deduced via the Quadratic formula. I don't know how to derive it for higher degrees, but mathematical induction might be a helpful technique. --N Y Kevin @326, i.e. 06:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider a general polynomial

P(x)=a_{n}x^{n}+a_{n-1}x^{n-1}+\dots +a_{1}x+a_{0}=a_{n}(x-\alpha _{1})(x-\alpha _{2})\dots (x-\alpha _{n}),\,\!

where the zeros α_i are members of C. The coefficient of x^{n − 1} on the LHS is a_{n − 1}. On the RHS, each term involving x^{n − 1} is obtained by selecting x (n − 1) times from the n brackets and one of the −α_i. Hence, comparing coefficients of like terms on both sides,

-a_{n}(\alpha _{1}+\alpha _{2}+\dots +\alpha _{n})=a_{n-1}.\,\!

The result follows with algebraic manipulation. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For more information on this subject, see elementary symmetric polynomial and Viete's formulas. Eric. 82.139.80.124 (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name this Surface

I've got a surface given by the equation x² + 2y³ – 3xyz = 0. The z ≠ 0 constant sections give loops with a node on the z-axis. The z = 0 section gives an ordinary cusp (a.k.a. a semi-cubical parabola), with the cusp point at the origin. I've drawn the pictures, and it's (diffeomorphic to) a very recognisable surface; I just don't remember its name. Any suggestions? — Fly by Night (talk) 13:54, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably obvious but MathWorld lists some surfaces, and you might try Encyclopédie des Formes Mathématiques Remarquables since it would have pretty much any named surface.--RDBury (talk) 20:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried MathWorld, and couldn't find it. The French reference isn't all that helpful because, as my original post says: "I just don't remember its name", and there doesn't seem to be an option to search for the formula. I did find a surface that look just like it, called the trichter surface on the German website Algebraic Surface Gallery; but its equation if x² + z³ – y²z², which is order four while mine is order three. — Fly by Night (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen the surface listed as S23 somewhere, possibly a reference to Cayley's classification of Cubic surfaces [1].--Salix (talk): 20:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it University of Turin Models--Salix (talk): 20:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly it! I can't thank you enough... — Fly by Night (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]