Re: Putnam 2005 -- some answers [SPOILER ALERT]
- From: rusin@xxxxxxxxxx (David Rusin)
- Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 10:20:36 +0000 (UTC)
In article <dmuc6u$sqq$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
David Rusin <rusin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>A-3.
>
>No idea.
Is this what Rolle's theorem looks like when wrapped around the
unit circle?
A polynomial like p, all of whose roots lie on the unit circle,
is (the numerator of) a composite f( (1-ti)/(1+ti) ), with f a
(multiple of a) real polynomial and t ranging over the real line.
(This is just the Moebius transfomation taking the real line to the
unit circle.) This gives one real root of f' between consecutive
pairs of roots on the real line, so that p' must have a root
on the unit circle between any two roots of p.
But I can't seem to turn this into the desired equation.
Maybe it's just getting late.
dave
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Putnam 2005 -- some answers [SPOILER ALERT]
- From: D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Putnam 2005 -- some answers [SPOILER ALERT]
- Prev by Date: Re: When is V* not isomorphic to V?
- Next by Date: Re: Putnam 2005 -- some answers [SPOILER ALERT]
- Previous by thread: canonical texts in math
- Next by thread: Re: Putnam 2005 -- some answers [SPOILER ALERT]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|