Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Given the polynomials $p_1(x_1, \ldots, x_n), \ldots,p_k(x_1, \ldots, x_n)$, let $\Lambda$ be the set of $x \in R^n$ where all of these polynomials are nonnegative. Does there exist a polynomial $q(x_1, \ldots, x_n)$ such that $\Lambda$ is the set of points where $q(x_1, \ldots, x_n)$ is nonnegative, i.e., $\Lambda = \{ x ~|~ q(x) \geq 0\}$?

share|improve this question
1  
Let $n=2$, let $p_1=x_1,p_2=x_2$. Is there a polynomial that is non-negative precisely on the (closed) first quadrant? –  Gerry Myerson Sep 8 '11 at 1:29

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

Not necessarily.

Consider the special case $p_1(x,y)=x$, $p_2(x,y)=y$. Then $q(x,y)$ should be nonnegative exactly when $x\ge 0$ and $y\ge 0$. The positive x axis is on the boundary of this set, so by continuity $q(x,0)=0$ for $x\ge 0$.

Now consider the function $x\mapsto q(x,0)$. This is a polynomial in one variable (it arises by dropping all terms with positive exponent in $y$). We've concluded that it must be identically zero for $x\ge 0$. But that must mean that it is the zero polynomial, because a nonzero polynomial in one variable cannot have more zeroes than its degree.

So in particular, for example, $q(-1,0)=0$. But that contradicts the assumption that $q(x,y)\ge0$ only for $x\ge 0$.

share|improve this answer
    
The fact that $q(x,0) = 0$ does not in itself imply that the entire $x$ axis is in the boundary of $\{(x,y): q(x,y) \ge 0\}$: maybe $q(x,y) < 0$ on both sides of $(x,0)$ if $x < 0$. To rule this out, you have to look at some partial derivatives. Let $k$ be the least positive integer such that $\dfrac{\partial^k q}{\partial y^k}(x,0) \ne 0$ for almost all $x$. Since $p(x,y)$ changes sign as you cross the $x$ axis for $x > 0$, $k$ must be odd. But since $p(x,y)$ does not change sign as you cross the $x$ axis for $x < 0$, $k$ must be even, contradiction! –  Robert Israel Sep 8 '11 at 1:37
1  
I don't need the entire x axis to be on the boundary specifically. Just plainly that if, say, $q(-1,0)=0$, then ipso facto $(-1,0) \in \{(x,y)\mid q(x,y)\ge 0\}$, contradicting the assumption that this was the case only for the closed first quadrant. –  Henning Makholm Sep 8 '11 at 1:41
    
Thank you very much for your answer. However, I wonder if you could explain the proof to me at my level (I am someone who does not know any algebra). You seem to be using the fact that if $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are polynomials with infinitely many zeros in common, one must divide the other. Might I trouble you for a pointer to the proof? –  robinson Sep 8 '11 at 1:42
    
Ah, of course. Silly of me. –  Robert Israel Sep 8 '11 at 1:44
1  
My comment would be relevant if you were talking about $\{(x,y): q(x,y) > 0\}$. –  Robert Israel Sep 8 '11 at 4:17

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.