Find a polynomial with integer coefficients whose solution is the multiplication of the solutions to other...
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $ax^2 + bx + c = 0$ and $dy^2 + ey + f = 0$ such that variables $a$ through $f$ are fixed integer parameters. I'm trying to find integers $g$, $h$, and $j$ such that $g(xy)^2 + h(xy) + j = 0$. I imagine the equation will be different depending on which roots of the original polynomials we consider. I'm looking for a proof either they exist or don't exist and if they do exist what they are in terms of the original integer values.
The motivation is that I'm trying to represent certain numbers using the form $x = [S, A, B, C]$ where $S$ denotes which root $x$ is to a quadratic polynomial $Ax^2 + Bx + C$. I'm trying to figure out how to multiply such numbers.
algebra-precalculus
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $ax^2 + bx + c = 0$ and $dy^2 + ey + f = 0$ such that variables $a$ through $f$ are fixed integer parameters. I'm trying to find integers $g$, $h$, and $j$ such that $g(xy)^2 + h(xy) + j = 0$. I imagine the equation will be different depending on which roots of the original polynomials we consider. I'm looking for a proof either they exist or don't exist and if they do exist what they are in terms of the original integer values.
The motivation is that I'm trying to represent certain numbers using the form $x = [S, A, B, C]$ where $S$ denotes which root $x$ is to a quadratic polynomial $Ax^2 + Bx + C$. I'm trying to figure out how to multiply such numbers.
algebra-precalculus
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $ax^2 + bx + c = 0$ and $dy^2 + ey + f = 0$ such that variables $a$ through $f$ are fixed integer parameters. I'm trying to find integers $g$, $h$, and $j$ such that $g(xy)^2 + h(xy) + j = 0$. I imagine the equation will be different depending on which roots of the original polynomials we consider. I'm looking for a proof either they exist or don't exist and if they do exist what they are in terms of the original integer values.
The motivation is that I'm trying to represent certain numbers using the form $x = [S, A, B, C]$ where $S$ denotes which root $x$ is to a quadratic polynomial $Ax^2 + Bx + C$. I'm trying to figure out how to multiply such numbers.
algebra-precalculus
Let $ax^2 + bx + c = 0$ and $dy^2 + ey + f = 0$ such that variables $a$ through $f$ are fixed integer parameters. I'm trying to find integers $g$, $h$, and $j$ such that $g(xy)^2 + h(xy) + j = 0$. I imagine the equation will be different depending on which roots of the original polynomials we consider. I'm looking for a proof either they exist or don't exist and if they do exist what they are in terms of the original integer values.
The motivation is that I'm trying to represent certain numbers using the form $x = [S, A, B, C]$ where $S$ denotes which root $x$ is to a quadratic polynomial $Ax^2 + Bx + C$. I'm trying to figure out how to multiply such numbers.
algebra-precalculus
algebra-precalculus
asked 2 hours ago
The Great Duck
11632047
11632047
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Here's one way to understand why such $g,h,j$ don't necessarily exist:
The roots of an integer quadratic are expressible as
$$frac{xpm sqrt{y}}{z}$$
for some integers $x,y,z$ (say, by the quadratic formula). If you multiply two of these together, you can get something like this:
$$left(frac{x_1+sqrt{y_1}}{z_1}right)left(frac{x_2+sqrt{y_2}}{z_2}right)=frac{x_1x_2+x_1sqrt{y_2}+y_1sqrt{x_2}+sqrt{y_1y_2}}{z_1z_2}.$$
We need these three square-root terms to somehow collapse into one for this to be expressible as $frac{X+sqrt{Y}}{Z}$ for some integers $X,Y,Z$. If there are no nontrivial relations between $sqrt{y_1}$ and $sqrt{y_2}$ (say, if $y_1=2$ and $y_2=3$), then we can't simplify the above at all, and thus it isn't a root of an integer-coefficient quadratic.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
There is a generic polynomial that will get you the products of the roots - but you can't keep the degree the same. After all, there's not necessarily any way to distinguish between the roots, so if one product appears as a root, all possible products of roots do. For two quadratics, that means that we're looking at a fourth-degree polynomial.
For simplicity, I'll work with two monic quadratics, $x^2+ax+b$ and $x^2+cx+d$, with roots $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$ respectively. We have $a=-(r_1+r_2)$, $b=r_1r_2$, $c=(-s_1+s_2)$, $d=s_1s_2$, and we want to find the symmetric functions of the products of roots to get the quartic $x^4+ex^3+fx^2+gx+h$.
First, the constant term $h=(r_1s_1)(r_1s_2)(r_2s_1)(r_2s_2)=r_1^2r_2^2s_1^2s_2^2=b^2d^2$.
Second, the $x^3$ term $e=-(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)=-(r_1+r_2)(s_1+s_2)=-ac$.
Third, the $x$ term
begin{align*}g &=-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_1-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_2-r_1s_1r_2s_1r_2s_2-r_1s_2r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&=-r_1r_2s_1s_2(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)\
&= -abcdend{align*}
Finally, the $x^2$ term
begin{align*}f &= r_1s_1r_1s_2+r_1s_1r_2s_1+r_1s_1r_2s_2+r_1s_2r_2s_1+r_1s_2r_2s_2+r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&= (r_1^2+r_2^2)s_1s_2+r_1r_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+2r_1r_2s_1s_2\
&= (a^2-2b)d+(c^2-2d)b+2bd = a^2d+c^2b-2bdend{align*}
Putting those together, the final polynomial is
$$x^4 -ac x^3 + (a^2d+c^2b-2bd)x^2 -abcd x + b^2d^2$$
If we tried to do the same with fewer of the products, to build a quadratic, it just wouldn't work. The building blocks we have are the symmetric polynomials in $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$, so anything we build with them will have to be symmetric as well; if $r_1s_1$ is a root, we can exchange $r_1$ and $r_2$ to get $r_2s_1$ as another root, or exchange $s_1$ and $s_2$ to get $r_1s_2$ as a third root, or exchange both to get $r_2s_2$ as a fourth root. It's all four or none. We've shown that getting just those four roots is possible, so that's the best that can be done.
In fact, it's typical that for two irreducible quadratics, the quartic we build this way will be irreducible as well. We'd need a coincidence like the discriminants being the same (up to multiplication by a perfect square) to avoid it.
add a comment |
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',
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%2f3037623%2ffind-a-polynomial-with-integer-coefficients-whose-solution-is-the-multiplication%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
up vote
3
down vote
Here's one way to understand why such $g,h,j$ don't necessarily exist:
The roots of an integer quadratic are expressible as
$$frac{xpm sqrt{y}}{z}$$
for some integers $x,y,z$ (say, by the quadratic formula). If you multiply two of these together, you can get something like this:
$$left(frac{x_1+sqrt{y_1}}{z_1}right)left(frac{x_2+sqrt{y_2}}{z_2}right)=frac{x_1x_2+x_1sqrt{y_2}+y_1sqrt{x_2}+sqrt{y_1y_2}}{z_1z_2}.$$
We need these three square-root terms to somehow collapse into one for this to be expressible as $frac{X+sqrt{Y}}{Z}$ for some integers $X,Y,Z$. If there are no nontrivial relations between $sqrt{y_1}$ and $sqrt{y_2}$ (say, if $y_1=2$ and $y_2=3$), then we can't simplify the above at all, and thus it isn't a root of an integer-coefficient quadratic.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Here's one way to understand why such $g,h,j$ don't necessarily exist:
The roots of an integer quadratic are expressible as
$$frac{xpm sqrt{y}}{z}$$
for some integers $x,y,z$ (say, by the quadratic formula). If you multiply two of these together, you can get something like this:
$$left(frac{x_1+sqrt{y_1}}{z_1}right)left(frac{x_2+sqrt{y_2}}{z_2}right)=frac{x_1x_2+x_1sqrt{y_2}+y_1sqrt{x_2}+sqrt{y_1y_2}}{z_1z_2}.$$
We need these three square-root terms to somehow collapse into one for this to be expressible as $frac{X+sqrt{Y}}{Z}$ for some integers $X,Y,Z$. If there are no nontrivial relations between $sqrt{y_1}$ and $sqrt{y_2}$ (say, if $y_1=2$ and $y_2=3$), then we can't simplify the above at all, and thus it isn't a root of an integer-coefficient quadratic.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Here's one way to understand why such $g,h,j$ don't necessarily exist:
The roots of an integer quadratic are expressible as
$$frac{xpm sqrt{y}}{z}$$
for some integers $x,y,z$ (say, by the quadratic formula). If you multiply two of these together, you can get something like this:
$$left(frac{x_1+sqrt{y_1}}{z_1}right)left(frac{x_2+sqrt{y_2}}{z_2}right)=frac{x_1x_2+x_1sqrt{y_2}+y_1sqrt{x_2}+sqrt{y_1y_2}}{z_1z_2}.$$
We need these three square-root terms to somehow collapse into one for this to be expressible as $frac{X+sqrt{Y}}{Z}$ for some integers $X,Y,Z$. If there are no nontrivial relations between $sqrt{y_1}$ and $sqrt{y_2}$ (say, if $y_1=2$ and $y_2=3$), then we can't simplify the above at all, and thus it isn't a root of an integer-coefficient quadratic.
Here's one way to understand why such $g,h,j$ don't necessarily exist:
The roots of an integer quadratic are expressible as
$$frac{xpm sqrt{y}}{z}$$
for some integers $x,y,z$ (say, by the quadratic formula). If you multiply two of these together, you can get something like this:
$$left(frac{x_1+sqrt{y_1}}{z_1}right)left(frac{x_2+sqrt{y_2}}{z_2}right)=frac{x_1x_2+x_1sqrt{y_2}+y_1sqrt{x_2}+sqrt{y_1y_2}}{z_1z_2}.$$
We need these three square-root terms to somehow collapse into one for this to be expressible as $frac{X+sqrt{Y}}{Z}$ for some integers $X,Y,Z$. If there are no nontrivial relations between $sqrt{y_1}$ and $sqrt{y_2}$ (say, if $y_1=2$ and $y_2=3$), then we can't simplify the above at all, and thus it isn't a root of an integer-coefficient quadratic.
answered 2 hours ago
Carl Schildkraut
10.9k11439
10.9k11439
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
There is a generic polynomial that will get you the products of the roots - but you can't keep the degree the same. After all, there's not necessarily any way to distinguish between the roots, so if one product appears as a root, all possible products of roots do. For two quadratics, that means that we're looking at a fourth-degree polynomial.
For simplicity, I'll work with two monic quadratics, $x^2+ax+b$ and $x^2+cx+d$, with roots $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$ respectively. We have $a=-(r_1+r_2)$, $b=r_1r_2$, $c=(-s_1+s_2)$, $d=s_1s_2$, and we want to find the symmetric functions of the products of roots to get the quartic $x^4+ex^3+fx^2+gx+h$.
First, the constant term $h=(r_1s_1)(r_1s_2)(r_2s_1)(r_2s_2)=r_1^2r_2^2s_1^2s_2^2=b^2d^2$.
Second, the $x^3$ term $e=-(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)=-(r_1+r_2)(s_1+s_2)=-ac$.
Third, the $x$ term
begin{align*}g &=-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_1-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_2-r_1s_1r_2s_1r_2s_2-r_1s_2r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&=-r_1r_2s_1s_2(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)\
&= -abcdend{align*}
Finally, the $x^2$ term
begin{align*}f &= r_1s_1r_1s_2+r_1s_1r_2s_1+r_1s_1r_2s_2+r_1s_2r_2s_1+r_1s_2r_2s_2+r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&= (r_1^2+r_2^2)s_1s_2+r_1r_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+2r_1r_2s_1s_2\
&= (a^2-2b)d+(c^2-2d)b+2bd = a^2d+c^2b-2bdend{align*}
Putting those together, the final polynomial is
$$x^4 -ac x^3 + (a^2d+c^2b-2bd)x^2 -abcd x + b^2d^2$$
If we tried to do the same with fewer of the products, to build a quadratic, it just wouldn't work. The building blocks we have are the symmetric polynomials in $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$, so anything we build with them will have to be symmetric as well; if $r_1s_1$ is a root, we can exchange $r_1$ and $r_2$ to get $r_2s_1$ as another root, or exchange $s_1$ and $s_2$ to get $r_1s_2$ as a third root, or exchange both to get $r_2s_2$ as a fourth root. It's all four or none. We've shown that getting just those four roots is possible, so that's the best that can be done.
In fact, it's typical that for two irreducible quadratics, the quartic we build this way will be irreducible as well. We'd need a coincidence like the discriminants being the same (up to multiplication by a perfect square) to avoid it.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
There is a generic polynomial that will get you the products of the roots - but you can't keep the degree the same. After all, there's not necessarily any way to distinguish between the roots, so if one product appears as a root, all possible products of roots do. For two quadratics, that means that we're looking at a fourth-degree polynomial.
For simplicity, I'll work with two monic quadratics, $x^2+ax+b$ and $x^2+cx+d$, with roots $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$ respectively. We have $a=-(r_1+r_2)$, $b=r_1r_2$, $c=(-s_1+s_2)$, $d=s_1s_2$, and we want to find the symmetric functions of the products of roots to get the quartic $x^4+ex^3+fx^2+gx+h$.
First, the constant term $h=(r_1s_1)(r_1s_2)(r_2s_1)(r_2s_2)=r_1^2r_2^2s_1^2s_2^2=b^2d^2$.
Second, the $x^3$ term $e=-(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)=-(r_1+r_2)(s_1+s_2)=-ac$.
Third, the $x$ term
begin{align*}g &=-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_1-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_2-r_1s_1r_2s_1r_2s_2-r_1s_2r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&=-r_1r_2s_1s_2(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)\
&= -abcdend{align*}
Finally, the $x^2$ term
begin{align*}f &= r_1s_1r_1s_2+r_1s_1r_2s_1+r_1s_1r_2s_2+r_1s_2r_2s_1+r_1s_2r_2s_2+r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&= (r_1^2+r_2^2)s_1s_2+r_1r_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+2r_1r_2s_1s_2\
&= (a^2-2b)d+(c^2-2d)b+2bd = a^2d+c^2b-2bdend{align*}
Putting those together, the final polynomial is
$$x^4 -ac x^3 + (a^2d+c^2b-2bd)x^2 -abcd x + b^2d^2$$
If we tried to do the same with fewer of the products, to build a quadratic, it just wouldn't work. The building blocks we have are the symmetric polynomials in $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$, so anything we build with them will have to be symmetric as well; if $r_1s_1$ is a root, we can exchange $r_1$ and $r_2$ to get $r_2s_1$ as another root, or exchange $s_1$ and $s_2$ to get $r_1s_2$ as a third root, or exchange both to get $r_2s_2$ as a fourth root. It's all four or none. We've shown that getting just those four roots is possible, so that's the best that can be done.
In fact, it's typical that for two irreducible quadratics, the quartic we build this way will be irreducible as well. We'd need a coincidence like the discriminants being the same (up to multiplication by a perfect square) to avoid it.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
There is a generic polynomial that will get you the products of the roots - but you can't keep the degree the same. After all, there's not necessarily any way to distinguish between the roots, so if one product appears as a root, all possible products of roots do. For two quadratics, that means that we're looking at a fourth-degree polynomial.
For simplicity, I'll work with two monic quadratics, $x^2+ax+b$ and $x^2+cx+d$, with roots $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$ respectively. We have $a=-(r_1+r_2)$, $b=r_1r_2$, $c=(-s_1+s_2)$, $d=s_1s_2$, and we want to find the symmetric functions of the products of roots to get the quartic $x^4+ex^3+fx^2+gx+h$.
First, the constant term $h=(r_1s_1)(r_1s_2)(r_2s_1)(r_2s_2)=r_1^2r_2^2s_1^2s_2^2=b^2d^2$.
Second, the $x^3$ term $e=-(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)=-(r_1+r_2)(s_1+s_2)=-ac$.
Third, the $x$ term
begin{align*}g &=-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_1-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_2-r_1s_1r_2s_1r_2s_2-r_1s_2r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&=-r_1r_2s_1s_2(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)\
&= -abcdend{align*}
Finally, the $x^2$ term
begin{align*}f &= r_1s_1r_1s_2+r_1s_1r_2s_1+r_1s_1r_2s_2+r_1s_2r_2s_1+r_1s_2r_2s_2+r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&= (r_1^2+r_2^2)s_1s_2+r_1r_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+2r_1r_2s_1s_2\
&= (a^2-2b)d+(c^2-2d)b+2bd = a^2d+c^2b-2bdend{align*}
Putting those together, the final polynomial is
$$x^4 -ac x^3 + (a^2d+c^2b-2bd)x^2 -abcd x + b^2d^2$$
If we tried to do the same with fewer of the products, to build a quadratic, it just wouldn't work. The building blocks we have are the symmetric polynomials in $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$, so anything we build with them will have to be symmetric as well; if $r_1s_1$ is a root, we can exchange $r_1$ and $r_2$ to get $r_2s_1$ as another root, or exchange $s_1$ and $s_2$ to get $r_1s_2$ as a third root, or exchange both to get $r_2s_2$ as a fourth root. It's all four or none. We've shown that getting just those four roots is possible, so that's the best that can be done.
In fact, it's typical that for two irreducible quadratics, the quartic we build this way will be irreducible as well. We'd need a coincidence like the discriminants being the same (up to multiplication by a perfect square) to avoid it.
There is a generic polynomial that will get you the products of the roots - but you can't keep the degree the same. After all, there's not necessarily any way to distinguish between the roots, so if one product appears as a root, all possible products of roots do. For two quadratics, that means that we're looking at a fourth-degree polynomial.
For simplicity, I'll work with two monic quadratics, $x^2+ax+b$ and $x^2+cx+d$, with roots $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$ respectively. We have $a=-(r_1+r_2)$, $b=r_1r_2$, $c=(-s_1+s_2)$, $d=s_1s_2$, and we want to find the symmetric functions of the products of roots to get the quartic $x^4+ex^3+fx^2+gx+h$.
First, the constant term $h=(r_1s_1)(r_1s_2)(r_2s_1)(r_2s_2)=r_1^2r_2^2s_1^2s_2^2=b^2d^2$.
Second, the $x^3$ term $e=-(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)=-(r_1+r_2)(s_1+s_2)=-ac$.
Third, the $x$ term
begin{align*}g &=-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_1-r_1s_1r_1s_2r_2s_2-r_1s_1r_2s_1r_2s_2-r_1s_2r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&=-r_1r_2s_1s_2(r_1s_1+r_1s_2+r_2s_1+r_2s_2)\
&= -abcdend{align*}
Finally, the $x^2$ term
begin{align*}f &= r_1s_1r_1s_2+r_1s_1r_2s_1+r_1s_1r_2s_2+r_1s_2r_2s_1+r_1s_2r_2s_2+r_2s_1r_2s_2\
&= (r_1^2+r_2^2)s_1s_2+r_1r_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+2r_1r_2s_1s_2\
&= (a^2-2b)d+(c^2-2d)b+2bd = a^2d+c^2b-2bdend{align*}
Putting those together, the final polynomial is
$$x^4 -ac x^3 + (a^2d+c^2b-2bd)x^2 -abcd x + b^2d^2$$
If we tried to do the same with fewer of the products, to build a quadratic, it just wouldn't work. The building blocks we have are the symmetric polynomials in $r_1,r_2$ and $s_1,s_2$, so anything we build with them will have to be symmetric as well; if $r_1s_1$ is a root, we can exchange $r_1$ and $r_2$ to get $r_2s_1$ as another root, or exchange $s_1$ and $s_2$ to get $r_1s_2$ as a third root, or exchange both to get $r_2s_2$ as a fourth root. It's all four or none. We've shown that getting just those four roots is possible, so that's the best that can be done.
In fact, it's typical that for two irreducible quadratics, the quartic we build this way will be irreducible as well. We'd need a coincidence like the discriminants being the same (up to multiplication by a perfect square) to avoid it.
answered 1 hour ago
jmerry
4465
4465
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
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%2f3037623%2ffind-a-polynomial-with-integer-coefficients-whose-solution-is-the-multiplication%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
That's impossible. Consider $x^2+2x-4=0$ and $x^2+4x-4=0$, the minimal polynomial of the product of the roots of equation is quartic.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen which pair of roots?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Each pair of roots is OK.
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago
@KemonoChen im confused. You said some root of the first equation times some root of the second equation has a quartic as its minimal polynomial. Are you saying they are all like that or are you saying any two will not require a quartic?
– The Great Duck
2 hours ago
Yes. ${}{}{}{}$
– Kemono Chen
2 hours ago