You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
My question: Where do you even begin when given a polynomial such as in this form and how would you solve it?
Last edited by evene (2016-06-16 07:55:01)
Offline
You are correct, those are the roots.
I would do it numerically, deflating out as I go. When I have them all I would apply the PSLQ to get the form you desire.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
...
I substituted
to getWe want the roots, so setting
will give us the roots.Last edited by evene (2016-06-16 08:25:30)
Offline
Full work:
Let . From that, we have which simplifies into .Setting
and we get . Equating terms together, we get and . Since , we have . So for .We want the real part so we use the formula
to get the rootsOffline
First check the geometry of the roots.
Make use of Newton's iteration because it has quadratic convergence and the roots are well spaced apart.
x0 = 2 yields xn = 1.77091205130642
x0 = 1 yields xn = 1.136129493462312
x0 = 0 yields xn = .2410733605106461
x0 = -1 yields xn = -0.7092097740850714
x0 = -1.5 yields xn = -1.497021496342203
x0 = -2 yields xn = -1.941883634852104
Then take them over to the ISC or PSLQ them yourself to get the exact analytical answers.
.In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Okay, that works too!
Offline
Hi;
There must be a couple of more ways. This polynomial looks like it has been economized...
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I feel like my follow through is already simple enough. You simply use All Roots of Unity to solve the problem...
Offline
Offline
Hi;
That is the problem with methods like that. The numerical technique is more robust and can deal with a much wider range of problems but you must be able to program a bit. Also, and this changing you were not able to get nice clean closed forms. With the arrival of PSLQ that is no longer the case. Mind you, there is much work to be done along these lines as the technique is still in its infancy.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Pages: 1