Proof of hint in Rudin exercise concerning countability of algebraic numbers
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The problem from Rudin's POMA is reproduced below:
Exercise 2.2: A complex number $z$ is said to be algebraic if there are integers $a_0,ldots,a_n$, not all zero, such that
$$
a_0z^n+a_1z^{n-1}+cdots+a_{n-1}z+a_n=0.
$$
Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable. Hint: For every positive integer $N$ there are only finitely many equations with
$$
n+|a_0|+|a_1|+cdots+|a_n|=N.
$$
I think I've worked out how to use the hint effectively, but I'm curious as to the justification of the hint itself.
Ideas: Any positive integer $N$ effectively puts a bound on the order of the polynomials under consideration, namely $N-1$. The bound on the order of the polynomial also puts a bound on the number of coefficients being considered regardless of their value. Now, I know that a polynomial of order $n$ has at most $n$ distinct roots--how can I use that to good effect here?
If, say, $N=7$, then the order of the polynomials under consideration can be at most $6$ (otherwise all the coefficients would have to be 0 which is not permitted). If we are looking at a polynomial of degree 6, then we may only have one coefficient with a nonzero value, and that nonzero value would have to be 1.
Am I on the right track here? I'm not sure how to formalize this reasoning (or if it's even worth formalizing).
real-analysis
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The problem from Rudin's POMA is reproduced below:
Exercise 2.2: A complex number $z$ is said to be algebraic if there are integers $a_0,ldots,a_n$, not all zero, such that
$$
a_0z^n+a_1z^{n-1}+cdots+a_{n-1}z+a_n=0.
$$
Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable. Hint: For every positive integer $N$ there are only finitely many equations with
$$
n+|a_0|+|a_1|+cdots+|a_n|=N.
$$
I think I've worked out how to use the hint effectively, but I'm curious as to the justification of the hint itself.
Ideas: Any positive integer $N$ effectively puts a bound on the order of the polynomials under consideration, namely $N-1$. The bound on the order of the polynomial also puts a bound on the number of coefficients being considered regardless of their value. Now, I know that a polynomial of order $n$ has at most $n$ distinct roots--how can I use that to good effect here?
If, say, $N=7$, then the order of the polynomials under consideration can be at most $6$ (otherwise all the coefficients would have to be 0 which is not permitted). If we are looking at a polynomial of degree 6, then we may only have one coefficient with a nonzero value, and that nonzero value would have to be 1.
Am I on the right track here? I'm not sure how to formalize this reasoning (or if it's even worth formalizing).
real-analysis
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The problem from Rudin's POMA is reproduced below:
Exercise 2.2: A complex number $z$ is said to be algebraic if there are integers $a_0,ldots,a_n$, not all zero, such that
$$
a_0z^n+a_1z^{n-1}+cdots+a_{n-1}z+a_n=0.
$$
Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable. Hint: For every positive integer $N$ there are only finitely many equations with
$$
n+|a_0|+|a_1|+cdots+|a_n|=N.
$$
I think I've worked out how to use the hint effectively, but I'm curious as to the justification of the hint itself.
Ideas: Any positive integer $N$ effectively puts a bound on the order of the polynomials under consideration, namely $N-1$. The bound on the order of the polynomial also puts a bound on the number of coefficients being considered regardless of their value. Now, I know that a polynomial of order $n$ has at most $n$ distinct roots--how can I use that to good effect here?
If, say, $N=7$, then the order of the polynomials under consideration can be at most $6$ (otherwise all the coefficients would have to be 0 which is not permitted). If we are looking at a polynomial of degree 6, then we may only have one coefficient with a nonzero value, and that nonzero value would have to be 1.
Am I on the right track here? I'm not sure how to formalize this reasoning (or if it's even worth formalizing).
real-analysis
The problem from Rudin's POMA is reproduced below:
Exercise 2.2: A complex number $z$ is said to be algebraic if there are integers $a_0,ldots,a_n$, not all zero, such that
$$
a_0z^n+a_1z^{n-1}+cdots+a_{n-1}z+a_n=0.
$$
Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable. Hint: For every positive integer $N$ there are only finitely many equations with
$$
n+|a_0|+|a_1|+cdots+|a_n|=N.
$$
I think I've worked out how to use the hint effectively, but I'm curious as to the justification of the hint itself.
Ideas: Any positive integer $N$ effectively puts a bound on the order of the polynomials under consideration, namely $N-1$. The bound on the order of the polynomial also puts a bound on the number of coefficients being considered regardless of their value. Now, I know that a polynomial of order $n$ has at most $n$ distinct roots--how can I use that to good effect here?
If, say, $N=7$, then the order of the polynomials under consideration can be at most $6$ (otherwise all the coefficients would have to be 0 which is not permitted). If we are looking at a polynomial of degree 6, then we may only have one coefficient with a nonzero value, and that nonzero value would have to be 1.
Am I on the right track here? I'm not sure how to formalize this reasoning (or if it's even worth formalizing).
real-analysis
real-analysis
asked Nov 27 at 3:20
Jessica
414
414
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27
add a comment |
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
What Rudin is saying in his usual cryptic fashion is that you should associate to each $N$ a finite set of algebraic numbers (call it $X_N$), and then you should prove that {algebraic numbers} $subset bigcup X_N$.
For example, with $N=2$, you have just two possibilities for integer polynomials:
$n=1, a_0=1, a_1=0$, OR
$n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=0$
corresponding to the polynomials
$z$ and $-z$.
For $N=3$, you have
begin{align*}
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=-1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=-1 \
n=2, a_0=1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
n=2, a_0=-1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
end{align*}
and all the polynomials which those represent.
Let $X_N$ be the roots corresponding to all the polynomials listed for a given $N$. By (# roots $leq$ degree), and the fact that there is a finite list of polynomials for each $N$, $X_N$ is finite. For instance, you can roughly bound $|X_2|leq2$ and $|X_3|leq 8$ above.
After you've proven that every algebraic number belongs to some $X_N$, you can use the fact that a countable union of countable (finite in this case) sets is countable.
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
This seems a bit perverse but if you can find the following sets:
For each $n in mathbb N$ there is a set $A_n$ containing at most some finite number of $k_n$ polynomials, and the polynomials are of some maximum $m_n$ degree then there is a set $B_n$ containing most $k_ncdot m_n$ algebraic numbers, and if we can further do this so that $U_{nin mathbb N}A_n$ will contain all possible polynomials then $U_{nin mathbb N}B_n$ will contain all possible algebraic numbers.
And that being a countable union of finite sets is countable.
So all we have to divide all the possible polynomials into these finite sets.
Okay, we can take a polynomial $a_nx^n + .... + a_0$ and come up with a number $N = n + |a_n| + |a_{n-1}| + .... + a_0$. And we'll simply put it in a set called $A_N$. As every polynomial will have such a number every polynomial will get placed and as each number $N$ can only have a finite number of degrees and coefficients adding up to $N$ each $A_N$ is finite.
Ta-da! We are done.
Now if you are like every student I have ever met, you will probably ask well why not just say: For each degree of a polynomial there are only a countable number of coefficients for that possition, so there are only a countable union of countably many coeficients to determine a countable number of polynomials.
I'm not sure why that's not the intended method. I suspect is there is one pitfall, in that is very easy to fall into the trap not noticing polynomials must be finite and making a false conclusion that the set of infinite sequence of integers is countable.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
What Rudin is saying in his usual cryptic fashion is that you should associate to each $N$ a finite set of algebraic numbers (call it $X_N$), and then you should prove that {algebraic numbers} $subset bigcup X_N$.
For example, with $N=2$, you have just two possibilities for integer polynomials:
$n=1, a_0=1, a_1=0$, OR
$n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=0$
corresponding to the polynomials
$z$ and $-z$.
For $N=3$, you have
begin{align*}
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=-1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=-1 \
n=2, a_0=1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
n=2, a_0=-1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
end{align*}
and all the polynomials which those represent.
Let $X_N$ be the roots corresponding to all the polynomials listed for a given $N$. By (# roots $leq$ degree), and the fact that there is a finite list of polynomials for each $N$, $X_N$ is finite. For instance, you can roughly bound $|X_2|leq2$ and $|X_3|leq 8$ above.
After you've proven that every algebraic number belongs to some $X_N$, you can use the fact that a countable union of countable (finite in this case) sets is countable.
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
What Rudin is saying in his usual cryptic fashion is that you should associate to each $N$ a finite set of algebraic numbers (call it $X_N$), and then you should prove that {algebraic numbers} $subset bigcup X_N$.
For example, with $N=2$, you have just two possibilities for integer polynomials:
$n=1, a_0=1, a_1=0$, OR
$n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=0$
corresponding to the polynomials
$z$ and $-z$.
For $N=3$, you have
begin{align*}
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=-1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=-1 \
n=2, a_0=1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
n=2, a_0=-1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
end{align*}
and all the polynomials which those represent.
Let $X_N$ be the roots corresponding to all the polynomials listed for a given $N$. By (# roots $leq$ degree), and the fact that there is a finite list of polynomials for each $N$, $X_N$ is finite. For instance, you can roughly bound $|X_2|leq2$ and $|X_3|leq 8$ above.
After you've proven that every algebraic number belongs to some $X_N$, you can use the fact that a countable union of countable (finite in this case) sets is countable.
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
What Rudin is saying in his usual cryptic fashion is that you should associate to each $N$ a finite set of algebraic numbers (call it $X_N$), and then you should prove that {algebraic numbers} $subset bigcup X_N$.
For example, with $N=2$, you have just two possibilities for integer polynomials:
$n=1, a_0=1, a_1=0$, OR
$n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=0$
corresponding to the polynomials
$z$ and $-z$.
For $N=3$, you have
begin{align*}
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=-1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=-1 \
n=2, a_0=1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
n=2, a_0=-1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
end{align*}
and all the polynomials which those represent.
Let $X_N$ be the roots corresponding to all the polynomials listed for a given $N$. By (# roots $leq$ degree), and the fact that there is a finite list of polynomials for each $N$, $X_N$ is finite. For instance, you can roughly bound $|X_2|leq2$ and $|X_3|leq 8$ above.
After you've proven that every algebraic number belongs to some $X_N$, you can use the fact that a countable union of countable (finite in this case) sets is countable.
What Rudin is saying in his usual cryptic fashion is that you should associate to each $N$ a finite set of algebraic numbers (call it $X_N$), and then you should prove that {algebraic numbers} $subset bigcup X_N$.
For example, with $N=2$, you have just two possibilities for integer polynomials:
$n=1, a_0=1, a_1=0$, OR
$n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=0$
corresponding to the polynomials
$z$ and $-z$.
For $N=3$, you have
begin{align*}
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=1 \
n=1, a_0=1, a_1=-1 \
n=1, a_0=-1, a_1=-1 \
n=2, a_0=1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
n=2, a_0=-1, a_1=0, a_0=0 \
end{align*}
and all the polynomials which those represent.
Let $X_N$ be the roots corresponding to all the polynomials listed for a given $N$. By (# roots $leq$ degree), and the fact that there is a finite list of polynomials for each $N$, $X_N$ is finite. For instance, you can roughly bound $|X_2|leq2$ and $|X_3|leq 8$ above.
After you've proven that every algebraic number belongs to some $X_N$, you can use the fact that a countable union of countable (finite in this case) sets is countable.
edited Nov 27 at 4:15
answered Nov 27 at 3:56
user25959
1,559816
1,559816
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
add a comment |
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Thanks--I'm still trying to figure out how to use essentially a counting argument to come up with an upper bound for the number of polynomials associated with each $N$ (as you came up with 8 for $N=3$). Also, given the issue of boundedness is at play here as opposed to the exact number of complex roots, I don't think FTA is necessary so much as the claim that a polynomial of degree $k$ has at most $k$ roots right?
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 4:14
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
Whoops, I was grasping for the name of the fact that a degree $n$ polynomial has at most $n$ roots.
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:16
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
To see that the number of polynomials corresponding to $N$ is bounded, you should note that $n+|a_0|+cdots+|a_n|$ is a "partition" of $N$ and that's definitely finite. For example, an extremely rough bound on the number of partitions of $N$ is $N^N$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:18
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
In our situation, the partitions actually include potentially zero terms. Given $N$, you can have at most $N+1$ summands, each of which takes values between $0 and N$. So the number of polynomials on our list will be at most $(N+1)^(N+1)$
– user25959
Nov 27 at 4:30
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
This seems a bit perverse but if you can find the following sets:
For each $n in mathbb N$ there is a set $A_n$ containing at most some finite number of $k_n$ polynomials, and the polynomials are of some maximum $m_n$ degree then there is a set $B_n$ containing most $k_ncdot m_n$ algebraic numbers, and if we can further do this so that $U_{nin mathbb N}A_n$ will contain all possible polynomials then $U_{nin mathbb N}B_n$ will contain all possible algebraic numbers.
And that being a countable union of finite sets is countable.
So all we have to divide all the possible polynomials into these finite sets.
Okay, we can take a polynomial $a_nx^n + .... + a_0$ and come up with a number $N = n + |a_n| + |a_{n-1}| + .... + a_0$. And we'll simply put it in a set called $A_N$. As every polynomial will have such a number every polynomial will get placed and as each number $N$ can only have a finite number of degrees and coefficients adding up to $N$ each $A_N$ is finite.
Ta-da! We are done.
Now if you are like every student I have ever met, you will probably ask well why not just say: For each degree of a polynomial there are only a countable number of coefficients for that possition, so there are only a countable union of countably many coeficients to determine a countable number of polynomials.
I'm not sure why that's not the intended method. I suspect is there is one pitfall, in that is very easy to fall into the trap not noticing polynomials must be finite and making a false conclusion that the set of infinite sequence of integers is countable.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
This seems a bit perverse but if you can find the following sets:
For each $n in mathbb N$ there is a set $A_n$ containing at most some finite number of $k_n$ polynomials, and the polynomials are of some maximum $m_n$ degree then there is a set $B_n$ containing most $k_ncdot m_n$ algebraic numbers, and if we can further do this so that $U_{nin mathbb N}A_n$ will contain all possible polynomials then $U_{nin mathbb N}B_n$ will contain all possible algebraic numbers.
And that being a countable union of finite sets is countable.
So all we have to divide all the possible polynomials into these finite sets.
Okay, we can take a polynomial $a_nx^n + .... + a_0$ and come up with a number $N = n + |a_n| + |a_{n-1}| + .... + a_0$. And we'll simply put it in a set called $A_N$. As every polynomial will have such a number every polynomial will get placed and as each number $N$ can only have a finite number of degrees and coefficients adding up to $N$ each $A_N$ is finite.
Ta-da! We are done.
Now if you are like every student I have ever met, you will probably ask well why not just say: For each degree of a polynomial there are only a countable number of coefficients for that possition, so there are only a countable union of countably many coeficients to determine a countable number of polynomials.
I'm not sure why that's not the intended method. I suspect is there is one pitfall, in that is very easy to fall into the trap not noticing polynomials must be finite and making a false conclusion that the set of infinite sequence of integers is countable.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
This seems a bit perverse but if you can find the following sets:
For each $n in mathbb N$ there is a set $A_n$ containing at most some finite number of $k_n$ polynomials, and the polynomials are of some maximum $m_n$ degree then there is a set $B_n$ containing most $k_ncdot m_n$ algebraic numbers, and if we can further do this so that $U_{nin mathbb N}A_n$ will contain all possible polynomials then $U_{nin mathbb N}B_n$ will contain all possible algebraic numbers.
And that being a countable union of finite sets is countable.
So all we have to divide all the possible polynomials into these finite sets.
Okay, we can take a polynomial $a_nx^n + .... + a_0$ and come up with a number $N = n + |a_n| + |a_{n-1}| + .... + a_0$. And we'll simply put it in a set called $A_N$. As every polynomial will have such a number every polynomial will get placed and as each number $N$ can only have a finite number of degrees and coefficients adding up to $N$ each $A_N$ is finite.
Ta-da! We are done.
Now if you are like every student I have ever met, you will probably ask well why not just say: For each degree of a polynomial there are only a countable number of coefficients for that possition, so there are only a countable union of countably many coeficients to determine a countable number of polynomials.
I'm not sure why that's not the intended method. I suspect is there is one pitfall, in that is very easy to fall into the trap not noticing polynomials must be finite and making a false conclusion that the set of infinite sequence of integers is countable.
This seems a bit perverse but if you can find the following sets:
For each $n in mathbb N$ there is a set $A_n$ containing at most some finite number of $k_n$ polynomials, and the polynomials are of some maximum $m_n$ degree then there is a set $B_n$ containing most $k_ncdot m_n$ algebraic numbers, and if we can further do this so that $U_{nin mathbb N}A_n$ will contain all possible polynomials then $U_{nin mathbb N}B_n$ will contain all possible algebraic numbers.
And that being a countable union of finite sets is countable.
So all we have to divide all the possible polynomials into these finite sets.
Okay, we can take a polynomial $a_nx^n + .... + a_0$ and come up with a number $N = n + |a_n| + |a_{n-1}| + .... + a_0$. And we'll simply put it in a set called $A_N$. As every polynomial will have such a number every polynomial will get placed and as each number $N$ can only have a finite number of degrees and coefficients adding up to $N$ each $A_N$ is finite.
Ta-da! We are done.
Now if you are like every student I have ever met, you will probably ask well why not just say: For each degree of a polynomial there are only a countable number of coefficients for that possition, so there are only a countable union of countably many coeficients to determine a countable number of polynomials.
I'm not sure why that's not the intended method. I suspect is there is one pitfall, in that is very easy to fall into the trap not noticing polynomials must be finite and making a false conclusion that the set of infinite sequence of integers is countable.
answered Nov 27 at 4:56
fleablood
67.4k22684
67.4k22684
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3015284%2fproof-of-hint-in-rudin-exercise-concerning-countability-of-algebraic-numbers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Given $z$ a root of $P(x) = sum_{m=0}^n a_m x^m in mathbb{Z}[x]$ irreducible, let $N(P) = n+sum_{m=0}^n |a_m|$, then you can enumerate the polynomials with increasing $N(Q)$ and for each check if $z$ is a root of $Q$ (looking at $gcd(P,Q) in mathbb{Q}[x]$). You'll necessary find a $Q$ with $Q(z) = 0$.
– reuns
Nov 27 at 3:32
Sorry, I don't really understand this comment or how exactly it proves the hint (I imagine my misunderstanding may be due to the fact that I do not have much of an algebraic background).
– Jessica
Nov 27 at 3:40
The idea is it partition all possible polynomials (and therefore their algebraic number roots) into a countable number of finite sets. This is a strange and think outside the box way to do it, but there are only a finite number of polynomial where the sum of the coeeficients and the degree is $N$ that's one finite set. The union for every $N$ will contain all possible polynomials
– fleablood
Nov 27 at 4:27