A Vieta Problem

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 28 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 62

  • @alucs6362
    @alucs6362 24 дня назад +30

    Worth noting that the solution is the 16th Fibonnaci number! The value for b will end up being minus the 17th Fibonnaci number.
    That fact that one of the roots is phi allows us to derive this directly. Since phi^n=F_n*phi+F_n-1, where F_n is the nth Fibonnaci number (and the same is true for the other root, -1/phi) the degree 17 polynomial can be transformed into the equations:
    a(phi*F_17+F_16)+b(phi*F_16+F_15)+1=0, and
    a(-1/phi*F_17+F_16) + b(-1/phi*F_16+F_15)+1=0,
    Subtracting the equations from one another, we get
    a*F_17+b*F_16=0
    Substituting this back into either original equation, we obtain
    a*F_16+b*F_15+1=0.
    With a bit of algebra this gives us
    a= F_16/(F_15*F_17-(F_16)^2))
    And b= -a*F_17/F_16
    You can prove by induction that (F_n+1)*(F_n-1)-F_n^2=(-1)^n, which means the denominator of a is 1.
    So, a=F_16=987 and b=-F_17=-1597!
    This method also gives us the general value for the coefficients of polynomials of any degree. If x^2-x-1 is a factor of ax^(n+1)+bx^n+1, then a=F_n*(-1)^n and b= -(F_n+1)*(-1)^n.
    P.S.: the original proof had a couple mistakes, which were helpfully pointed out. I edited the comment to account for those

    • @slavinojunepri7648
      @slavinojunepri7648 24 дня назад +2

      On what basis did you separate a(phi*F_17+F_16)+b(phi*F_16)+1=0 into two equations?

    • @Grecks75
      @Grecks75 24 дня назад +2

      I don't think this way to a solution is logically consistent. I see two problems here:
      1) The first equation displayed (which you get from plugging in the known root phi) is not correct. It should instead read: a(phi*F_17+F_16)+b(phi*F_16 + F_15)+1=0. (Note the added "+ F_15" in the b term.) This is probably just a typo and thus is a minor point.
      2) This is where the logic breaks: If we assume a, b to be real or complex numbers, there is no way you can separate the first equation into two. There is no way you can get *both* a and b from a *single* equation! What you need is *two independent* equations. You can get the second equation from plugging in the second known root, which is (1 - phi) = -1/phi. Then you can solve the resulting system of two independent linear equations for both a and b. Interestingly, you will indeed arrive at the stated solution.

    • @alucs6362
      @alucs6362 24 дня назад +2

      @@slavinojunepri7648 Okay I took a moment to think about it. The separation I make only works if a and b are rational numbers. In this case they are in fact integers, but that can't just be assumed.
      The proper way to get to the separated equations is to realize that having two roots allows us to write both
      a(F_17*phi+F_16)+b(F_16*phi + F_15)+1=0, and
      a(-F_17*1/phi+F_16)+b(-F_16*1/phi + F_15)+1=0
      Subtracting them from one another, and dividing by (phi-1/phi) you get (a*F_17+b*F_16)=0. Substituting this into the original equation gives us back a*F_16+b*F_15+1=0. So you can indeed make the separation, but it needs a bit more justification!

    • @slavinojunepri7648
      @slavinojunepri7648 24 дня назад +1

      @@alucs6362 You may notice that both phi and -1/phi are both roots of x^2-x-1. Perhaps we could input them into ax^17+bx^16+1=0 to get a system of two equations in a and b. Just a thought!

    • @alucs6362
      @alucs6362 24 дня назад +1

      @@Grecks75 You're totally right on both accounts. I justify why you can actually make the separation in a comment below. Effectively, it's because you can cancel out the integer terms by substracting the identical equation you get with -1/phi instead of phi.

  • @sammyjskj
    @sammyjskj 24 дня назад +13

    What I love about your videos, is not only how you explain stuff, but your intro. I ABSOLUTELY love it. I hope you never change it

    • @kevinbush4300
      @kevinbush4300 24 дня назад +1

      Yes... absolutely.
      The best teachers tell you what they are going to teach you;
      then they teach it to you;
      then they tell you what they just taught you.

    • @MrJPI
      @MrJPI 21 день назад

      BTW: What is the music in the intro?

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  18 дней назад +2

      It's my personal music

  • @raghvendrasingh1289
    @raghvendrasingh1289 24 дня назад +18

    Excellent problem
    Another solution x^2= x+1
    squaring both sides and putting x^2 = x+1
    x^4 = 3x+2
    Similarly
    x^8 = 21 x+13
    x^16 = 987 x + 610
    x^17 = 987 x^2 +610x = 1597 x + 987
    If we put these values in P(x) = a x^17 +bx^16+1
    1597a+987b = 0
    987a+ 610b+1 = 0
    Hence a= 987 , b= - 1597

    • @graf_paper
      @graf_paper 24 дня назад

      I really enjoy this solution, thanks for sharing

    • @alucs6362
      @alucs6362 24 дня назад +2

      As someone pointed out to the solution I gave above, you need a bit more to justify why you can divide the condition into those two. Since the relation only holds for particular values of x you can't just separate them by degree!

    • @bobross7473
      @bobross7473 15 дней назад

      I don’t understand how the steps follow, I had a much longer method but it worked still

    • @raghvendrasingh1289
      @raghvendrasingh1289 15 дней назад

      @@bobross7473 I used factor theorem by putting reminder = 0 when P(x) is divided by x^2 - x - 1

  • @555amry
    @555amry 24 дня назад +3

    I absolutely LOVE this question, reason why is that you can relate the roots of x^2 - x - 1 to the Fibonacci sequence and find a solution that way. Amazing video, I’m glad I stumbled across this today

  • @Noonecc
    @Noonecc 24 дня назад +3

    The little thing that makes my day better everyday
    your channel and you
    And also you quote
    NEVER STOP LEARNING
    THOSE WHO STOPS LEARNING
    THEY STOPS LIVING

  • @MrJPI
    @MrJPI 24 дня назад +11

    That was actually incredible based on how difficult the question initially seemed. :-)

  • @jay_sensz
    @jay_sensz 24 дня назад +5

    The roots of x²-x-1 are the golden ratio φ and -φ⁻¹. Plugging the roots into the other polynomial gives two equations:
    a*φ^(17) + b*φ^(16) = -1
    -a*φ^(-17) + b*φ^(-16) = -1
    We have the matrix A [φ^(17), φ^(16);-φ^(-17), φ^(-16)] and we're looking for [a,b] = A⁻¹*[-1;-1].
    The determinant of A is φ+1/φ= sqrt(5).
    Using the formula for the inverse of a 2x2 matrix, a is 1/sqrt(5) * (-φ^(-16)+φ^(16)).
    This can be further simplified using the identity φ^(n)-φ^(-n) = sqrt(5) * Fₙ (where n is an even integer and Fₙ is the n-th Fibonacci number)
    Therefore a is sqrt(5)*F₁₆/sqrt(5) = F₁₆ = 987.

  • @JoshuaMay-e2n
    @JoshuaMay-e2n 24 дня назад +2

    An alternative, probably not as clever, method is factor directly:
    a x^17 + b x^16 + 1 = (x^2 - x - 1) * (A_15 x^15 + A_14 x^14 + ... + A_1 X + A_0)
    Equating powers you get
    a = A_15
    b = A_14 - A_15
    0 = A_13 - A_14 - A_15
    ...
    0 = A_0 - A_1 - A_2
    0 = -A_0 - A_1
    1 = -A_0
    Then straight-forward algebra gives you an (alternating sign) Fibonacci sequence for the A_n's, giving A_15 =a = Fib_16. I'm not sure which way is less easy to mess up the algebra on, though.

  • @michaelz2270
    @michaelz2270 24 дня назад

    A little trick to shorten the work: Multiplying the equation r_i^2 = r_i + 1 through by r_i^(k-2) gives r_i^k = r_i^(k-1) + r_i^(k-2). Subtracting this for i = 1 and i =2 gives r_1^k - r_2^k = (r_1^(k-1) - r_2^(k-1)) + (r_1^(k-2) - r_2^(k-2)). So the difference of kth powers satisfies the recursion of the Fibonacci sequence and also starts at 0 and 5^(1/2) for k = 0 and 1 respectively. So the difference of kth powers is is 5^(1/2) F_(16), where F(n) is the nth Fibonacci number, and the answer (r_2^(16) - r_1^(16))/(r_2 - r_1) = 5^(1/2) F_(16) / 5^(1/2) F_(1) = F_(16) = 987.

  • @narangfamily7668
    @narangfamily7668 24 дня назад +2

    Simply lovely

  • @vasileiossophianosd.1840
    @vasileiossophianosd.1840 22 дня назад +2

    You could use φ¹⁶=F_16*φ + F_15 and Φ¹⁶=F_16*Φ + F_15. Since te roots of x²-x-1 are φ,Φ

  • @slavinojunepri7648
    @slavinojunepri7648 24 дня назад +3

    If we perform a long division of ax^17+bx^16+1 by x^2-x-1, we get a remainder of (1597a+987)x+987a+610b+1. This remainder must be zero of all x, leading to the following system of two equations:
    1597a+987b=0
    987a+610b+1=0
    Solving this system yields a=987.

  • @dan-florinchereches4892
    @dan-florinchereches4892 24 дня назад

    I was thinking along the following line by rewriting the equality:
    r1^2=R1+1
    r2^2=R2+1
    Summing up r1^2+r2^2=(R1+R2)+1=1+1=2
    If we note r1+r2=S1=1 r1^2+r2^2=S2=2
    Then multiplying each equation by the respective root
    r1^3=r1^2+R1
    r2^3=r2^2+R2
    Adding up equations S3=S2+S1=1+2=3
    And this can be generalised as the next term of the fibonacci series S3=f4 and so on.
    Then knowing R1 and R2 are roots of the big polinomial
    ar1^17+br2^16+1=0
    ar2^17+br2^16+1=0
    Adding up equations
    a *s17+ b* s16+2=0
    a* f18+ b* f17+2 =0
    This gives me a lot of solutions. I guess this is why I suck at Olympiad problems
    If R1>R2 then let D1=r1-r2=√5
    r1^2=r1+1
    r2^2=R2+1
    Subtracting
    D2=D1=√5
    D3=D2+D1=2√5
    So in general Dn=Fn√5 where Fn is nth fibonacci number.
    So
    a * F18+b*F17+2=0 (from sum)
    a * F17√5+b*F16√5=0 (from difference)
    => b=-a*F17/F16
    => a(f18-f17^2/F16)+2=0
    a=2*F16/(F17^2-F18*F16)
    I don't think writing Fn=1/√5(r1^n-r2^n) is going to help.working on denominator
    F18=F17+F16
    => F17^2-F17F16-F16^2=F17(F17-F16)-F16^2=(because F17=F16+F15) F17F15-F16^2=F16F15+F15^2-F16^2=(factoring F16 and using identity of fib series)F15^2-F16F14
    Looks like F17^2-F18F16=F15^2-F16F14=...=F3^2-F4F2=2^2-3*1=1
    =>a=2*F16

  • @hervesergegbeto3352
    @hervesergegbeto3352 18 дней назад

    C'est merveilleux !

  • @abulfazmehdizada
    @abulfazmehdizada 23 дня назад

    To determine \( a \) such that \( x^2 - x - 1 \) is a factor of the polynomial \( ax^{17} + bx^{16} + 1 \), we can use the fact that if \( x^2 - x - 1 \) is a factor, then the roots of this polynomial must also satisfy \( ax^{17} + bx^{16} + 1 = 0 \).
    The roots of \( x^2 - x - 1 = 0 \) are given by the quadratic formula:
    \[
    x = \frac{1 \pm \sqrt{5}}{2}
    \]
    Let's denote the roots as:
    \[
    \phi = \frac{1 + \sqrt{5}}{2} \quad \text{(the golden ratio)}, \quad \text{and} \quad \psi = \frac{1 - \sqrt{5}}{2}
    \]
    Now, we need to evaluate \( ax^{17} + bx^{16} + 1 \) at both \( \phi \) and \( \psi \) and set these equal to zero.
    Using the Fibonacci sequence properties, we know:
    \[
    \phi^n = \frac{\phi^{n+1} - \phi^{n-1}}{\sqrt{5}}
    \]
    Specifically, we can derive:
    - \( \phi^0 = 1 \)
    - \( \phi^1 = \phi \)
    - \( \phi^2 = \phi + 1 \)
    - \( \phi^3 = 2\phi + 1 \)
    - \( \phi^4 = 3\phi + 2 \)
    - Continuing this pattern, we find that:
    - \( \phi^n = F_n \phi + F_{n-1} \)
    where \( F_n \) is the \( n \)-th Fibonacci number.
    Using this relation, we can compute \( \phi^{16} \) and \( \phi^{17} \).
    \[
    \phi^{16} = F_{16} \phi + F_{15}
    \]
    \[
    \phi^{17} = F_{17} \phi + F_{16}
    \]
    The Fibonacci numbers relevant to this are:
    - \( F_{15} = 610 \)
    - \( F_{16} = 987 \)
    - \( F_{17} = 1597 \)
    Thus:
    \[
    \phi^{16} = 987\phi + 610
    \]
    \[
    \phi^{17} = 1597\phi + 987
    \]
    Now substituting into the polynomial:
    \[
    a(1597\phi + 987) + b(987\phi + 610) + 1 = 0
    \]
    \[
    (1597a + 987b)\phi + (987a + 610b + 1) = 0
    \]
    For this to hold for all \( x \), both coefficients must equal zero:
    1. \( 1597a + 987b = 0 \)
    2. \( 987a + 610b + 1 = 0 \)
    From the first equation, we get:
    \[
    b = -\frac{1597}{987}a
    \]
    Substituting \( b \) into the second equation:
    \[
    987a + 610\left(-\frac{1597}{987}a
    ight) + 1 = 0
    \]
    \[
    987a - \frac{610 \cdot 1597}{987}a + 1 = 0
    \]
    \[
    \left(987 - \frac{610 \cdot 1597}{987}
    ight)a + 1 = 0
    \]
    Multiplying through by \( 987 \):
    \[
    (987^2 - 610 \cdot 1597)a + 987 = 0
    \]
    Now we calculate \( 987^2 \) and \( 610 \cdot 1597 \):
    - \( 987^2 = 974169 \)
    - \( 610 \cdot 1597 = 974170 \)
    Thus:
    \[
    (974169 - 974170)a + 987 = 0
    \]
    \[
    -a + 987 = 0 \quad \Rightarrow \quad a = 987
    \]
    Therefore, the value of \( a \) is:
    \[
    \boxed{987}
    \]

  • @bestmathuae
    @bestmathuae 23 дня назад +1

    Polynomials used to be my favourite and the easiest........................................................... but then I watched this video ⚠💀

  • @MBSall
    @MBSall 15 дней назад

    Can we find the value of b by isolating a this time

  • @rohangt1
    @rohangt1 24 дня назад

    I have a question and would like to know the response -:
    If x > y, then -:
    Is x^y > y^x true or false or both?

    • @carultch
      @carultch 24 дня назад

      Not enough information.
      Assuming positive real values of x&y, and given x > y. I haven't explored negatives or non-reals.
      If y>e, then y^x is always greater than x^y, when x>y.
      If y1, then there are two special case points where x^y = y^x, and between which y^x > x^y, for all real values of x&y. For instance, 2^4 = 4^2, and between the two special cases, the base dominates the exponent, such as like 2^3 < 3^2. While outside these points, the exponent dominates, e.g. 2^5 > 5^2.
      If y=e, there's only one point where x^y can equal y^x, which is when they both equal e. Everywhere else, the exponent dominates and y^x is greater.
      If y

    • @rohangt1
      @rohangt1 24 дня назад

      @carultch Looks like this problem can be a great idea for next video if it's solvable for all possible cases. I don't know if this question comes/can come in any of the exams/competitive exams or not. But if it comes/can come, then solution to this problem can help.

  • @ManojkantSamal
    @ManojkantSamal 24 дня назад

    Incredible!

  • @Football.avengers.
    @Football.avengers. 13 дней назад

    Can you find the integral of x^[ln (x)]

  • @andrasferencz7948
    @andrasferencz7948 24 дня назад

    Brilliant!

  • @wildfire_
    @wildfire_ 24 дня назад +3

    i feel like every video, it takes longer to get into the video.

  • @ironfbody
    @ironfbody 19 дней назад

    Using the traditional alpha and beta for the quadratic roots would have meant a lot less writing.

  • @camilotiznado5325
    @camilotiznado5325 23 дня назад +1

    should it be r1+r2 = -1?

    • @SamuelDonald-pr2uu
      @SamuelDonald-pr2uu 20 дней назад

      No it’s 1. The formula is: -b/a. The negative sign will be affected and that gives plus.

  • @Notking444.
    @Notking444. 24 дня назад +3

    Can you make lecture videos of differentiation and log and all. By the I like your effort ❤❤❤

  • @HridikKanjilal4444-k5f
    @HridikKanjilal4444-k5f 24 дня назад +1

    That day I have sent you that problem but you did not even look at that, I had sent it in the gmail account given in the previous video of yours

  • @ThePayner11
    @ThePayner11 24 дня назад

    Is this related to Lucas Numbers?

  • @XX-sf1eh
    @XX-sf1eh 24 дня назад

    Awesome 😄

  • @VarunPatwal
    @VarunPatwal 24 дня назад +1

    Gr8 👍

  • @akiya9216
    @akiya9216 24 дня назад +3

    pretty neat solution :)

  • @mooshroommoon
    @mooshroommoon 22 дня назад

    Can you solve x to the tetration of itself?

  • @anestismoutafidis4575
    @anestismoutafidis4575 24 дня назад

    x^2-x-1=0 φ^2-φ-1=0;
    x1=αx^17; x2=bx^16
    [-0,1•φ^17 +(φ/10 - 4,5×10^-4)•φ^16+1=0]
    α=-0,1; b=(φ/10 - 4,5×10^-4);
    -p=-1; q=18,88^4; [α= - 1/10]

  • @xsimox13
    @xsimox13 24 дня назад

    à is the 16 th Fibonacci number 987

  • @pillegraknel4308
    @pillegraknel4308 24 дня назад +1

    You could have been using that "not so nice" number (root of the x²-x-1) symbolically with the same result don't you? :D You just swap the r1 and r2 with phi, done.

  • @pieterschadron3644
    @pieterschadron3644 24 дня назад +2

    I like you're presentations but I think the mistake at 3 minutes 34 seconds in this video is disturbing. You claim the sum of the roots r1 and r2 is 1. This must be negative 1.

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  24 дня назад +1

      You need to state why you say it was a mistake. Where did you get -1?

    • @pieterschadron3644
      @pieterschadron3644 24 дня назад

      @@PrimeNewtons x^2+p*x+q=0 can be solved by finding r1 and r2; r1 + r2=p and r1*r2=q, in your calculation p=-1 and q=-1.

    • @DontKnow-6969
      @DontKnow-6969 24 дня назад

      ​@@pieterschadron3644r1+r2=-p bro check vieta's theorem

    • @robertpearce8394
      @robertpearce8394 23 дня назад

      ​​​@@pieterschadron3644
      (x-r1)*(x-r2)=(x^2-x(r1+r2)+r1r2)
      r1+r2=1 (-p in the general equation)
      r1*r2=-1

    • @camilotiznado5325
      @camilotiznado5325 23 дня назад

      agree. the multiplication of the roots should be the free number (r1*r2=-1), and the sum should be the coeficient of "x", in this case r1+r2=-1