Ths isn't the proper Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic (which includes complex roots), but just the maximum number of real roots for polynomial $f(x)$ with real coefficients... which is $deg(f)$.

I believe there isn't a High School-level proof of the full theorem, but is there one of this simpler theorem?

I think there should be a very simple proof using the Factor Theorem:

$$f(a)=0 \iff (x-a) \mid f(x)$$

The only way to have an extra zero is to have an extra factor of $(x-a)$, which increases the degree by one.

Because an extra factor might be the same as one already present, forming a multiple root or zero, the number of distinct roots may be fewer than this. So it is only a maximum.∎

However, I'm not sure how to make this rigorous, or how to show it covers all possible polynomials (i.e. all polynomials can be built up from $(x-a)$ factors - maybe it follows from the Factor Theorem?).

Or maybe there's a completely different, simpler approach?

BTW: I am interested in it as a way to understand the Schwartz-Zippel lemma for Polynomial Identity Testing (a probabilistic algorithm: subtracting the polynomials to get zero if identical, then use the maximum zeros/roots to calculate probability of guessing roots - false positives). The relevant part to this question is:

A polynomial of one variable of degree {d} can vanish at only {d} points without being identically zero The Curious History of the Schwartz-Zippel Lemma

Also at the wikipedia article

a polynomial of degree d can have no more than d roots.

Because the guesses can be made using only integers (I think modulo, making them fields), it seems to me that the simpler theorem for real polynomials should be enough...

  • 1
    If you are trying to show that a polynomial can have no more than $\partial f$ distinct roots, then you can use polynomial division to show the result (that is, if $r_1,...,r_p$ are distinct roots of $f$ then show $\partial f \ge p$). Otherwise, you need to characterise what is meant by a multiple root. As you are probably aware, $x^2+1$ has no real roots. – copper.hat May 14 at 5:11
  • @copper.hat Thanks, yes that's what I want, for reals. I think I follow you: for each of the $p$ distinct real roots $r_p$, there is a distinct factor $(x-r_p)$, and (because there may be other distinct factors, duplicate factors, and factors thst can't be reduced, like $x^2+1$), the degree is at least $p$. Starting from distinct roots avoids the problem. Proving an inequality means we needn't prove the converse. I forgot about complex roots, and they mean I was wrong: one can't build up every polynomial from factors like $(x-r), r \in \Bbb R$, like your example $x^2+1$. – hyperpallium May 14 at 8:17
  • I think the basic fact for showing the result is that $\partial (f \cdot g) = \partial f + \partial g$. Hence each distinct, real root adds one to the degree. – copper.hat May 14 at 16:10
  • @copper.hat I see that (and the idea is in my sketch), but I have trouble putting it all together into a rigorous proof - and seeing/showing that it is indeed rigorous. I was hoping there'd be a standard detailed proof - but I guess that is all done on the proper FTA. – hyperpallium May 15 at 9:44

If $P(x)$ is a polynomial such that $P(a)=0$ then it is only possible when it can be expressed as $(x-a)F(x)$ because when we subsitute $x=a$ we get $0$
The second statement is also obvious,
Let $P(x)$ have $p$ roots then it may be written as $(x-p_1)(x-p_2)...(x-p_p)$ which is a polynomial of degree p.

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

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