Do we have to use Euler's method and compare real part etc. or is there a MX2 way to do it ?
What do you mean by euler's method?Do we have to use Euler's method and compare real part etc. or is there a MX2 way to do it ?
Euler's Formula sorry, applyingWhat do you mean by euler's method?
there is a MX2 way of doing it
Well the HSC method would be very similar to it, in your method, just change every e^(iy) into cos y + i sin y, and it will still work out with De Moivere'sEuler's Formula sorry
e^{iy}=cos y+sin y
But if you didn't think of it, I probably did something retarded...
Multiply it by a sufficiently large integer to make it an integer polynomial Q(x) which is also good. Let the leading coefficient of Q be A and the constant be C. Now, considering the graph of Q(x)-C, we can make a prime p large enough so that Q(x)+p-c is above the x-axis for -1<=x<=1. We can also make p a prime that does not divide A. So, let such a prime be called q. Now, Q(x)+q-C where q is prime is also good and hence has only rational roots. Its constant term is q. Consider a root of this polynomial c/d. So, d divides A and, since q does not divide A, q doesn't divide d. However, c divides q. So, c=1 or c=q. If c=1, then -1<=c/d<=1 which is a contradiction since Q(x)+q-c is above the x-axis for such values of x. So, c=q.
Let p(x) have its minimum value point at Q.Here is a good one:
That is the sketch of the proof, but can you explain why we get the conclusion from (1) (2) and (3)?Let p(x) have its minimum value point at Q.
So p(x)>= p(Q) (1)
p(Q)>=p''(Q) ...given (2)
p''(Q)>=0 (because its the concavity at the min point of even degree positive coeff. polynomial)...(3)
So combining (1), (2) & (3)
We get that p(x)>=0
I think my (3) is pretty dodgy...
I don't get what you want me to explain.That is the sketch of the proof, but can you explain why we get the conclusion from (1) (2) and (3)?
Wait yea nevermind my method was a little different to yours, it involved a proof by contradiction (kinda).I don't get what you want me to explain.
Like actually define a polynomial and then do some random algebra or just explain what I did in more words?
You can prove that it converges easily as:
(can definitely be done within syllabus)
True (provided you can prove the product is not periodic) I didn't think about convergence anyway hahaYou can prove that it converges easily as: