2
$\begingroup$

Let $0<a_1<a_2<\cdots<a_n$ be real numbers. Show that the equation has exactly $n$ real roots.

$\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^n \dfrac{a_i} {a_i-x} =2015$

I multiplied out denominators and that was very long, but I don't think descarte's rule will be helpful. Please any help is appreciated.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ i suppose u meant x in the denominator $\endgroup$ – user379195 May 11 '17 at 4:57
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah corrected that! $\endgroup$ – Aditya Narayan Sharma May 11 '17 at 4:59
6
$\begingroup$

$\displaystyle f(x)=\bigg(\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\frac{a_i}{a_i-x}\bigg)-2015\quad$ with all $a_i>0$.

$\displaystyle f'(x)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\underbrace{\frac{a_i}{(a_i-x)^2}}_{>0}>0\quad$ so $f$ is increasing on each interval where it is defined.

It is also clear that $f$ is continuous except in its poles, thus on $\mathbb R\setminus\{a_1,a_2,...,a_n\}$.

$\begin{cases} \displaystyle \lim\limits_{x\to a_i^-}f(x)=+\infty\\ \displaystyle \lim\limits_{x\to a_i^+}f(x)=-\infty\\ \end{cases}$

By applying intermediate value theorem and using that $f\ \nearrow$ strictly, there is exactly $1$ real root in $]a_i,a_{i+1}[$, making this $n-1$ roots for $i=1..n$.

We have also $\lim\limits_{x\to-\infty}f(x)=-2015<0$ so there is $1$ root in $]-\infty,a_1[$.

We have also $\lim\limits_{x\to+\infty}f(x)=-2015<0$ so there is no root in $]a_n,+\infty[$.

Combining the results, gives exactly $n$ roots in $\mathbb R$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The interval method gives n-2 roots $\endgroup$ – user379195 May 11 '17 at 6:26
  • $\begingroup$ Why n-2 ? There are $n-1$ intervals. $\endgroup$ – zwim May 11 '17 at 6:56
1
$\begingroup$

another way is assume it has a complex root which is non real (it has roots by fundamental theorem of algebra). Let $x+iy$ be the complex root. Then we have $\sum_{i=1}^n a_i/(a_i-x-iy)=2015$ Multiply the lower side by conjugate to conclude $\sum_{i=1}^n (a_i^2-a_ix+ia_iy)/((a_i-x)^2+y^2)=2015$ Hence $\sum_{i=1}^na_iy/((a_i-x)^2+y^2)=0$ by comparing the imaginary part since each term has the same sign so $y=0$ . The fundamental theorem of algebra is applicable because the eqn reduces to solving a polynomial equation.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This method is great, thanks +1 $\endgroup$ – Aditya Narayan Sharma May 11 '17 at 5:18
  • $\begingroup$ i think the second method uses less information (but heavier machinery) $\endgroup$ – user379195 May 11 '17 at 5:21
  • $\begingroup$ Disproving the existence of any complex root what so ever is great, that's why I preferred this over IVT $\endgroup$ – Aditya Narayan Sharma May 11 '17 at 5:25
  • $\begingroup$ Guess there are no bugs now $\endgroup$ – user379195 May 11 '17 at 6:24
  • $\begingroup$ Surely the problem with this solution is that it assumes something (The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra) which is FAR more difficult to prove than what is asked in the question. I am guessing the OP has just learned the IVT, which is needed one way or another to do the question. $\endgroup$ – ancientmathematician May 11 '17 at 6:34
0
$\begingroup$

define $b_i=(a_i+a_{i+1})/2$ then considering the function $\prod_{i=1}^n(a_i-x)-\sum_{i=1}^n \prod_{j\neq i}(a_j-x)$ show that $f(b_i)$ is alternatively positive and negative. So there exists a real root in the intervals $(a_i,a_{i+1})$. Now multiply without expanding and put $a_1$ and $a_n$ respectively and compare with the behaviour of the polynomial you get by multiplying at $\infty,-\infty$ to get the remaining two roots which lie in $(-\infty,a_1)$ and $(a_n,\infty)$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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