Proof of Roots of Unity: Solving a Missing Step

In summary, the person was trying to follow the steps of a proof but was having trouble and was asking for help. The person explained that they had missed something obvious and it was easy to fix.
  • #1
gonzo
277
0
I'm having trouble following one step in a proof I'm studying. I'm sure I'm missing something obvious, but I just can't get it to work out (it supposed to be "obvious" which is why they left out the details).

Anyway, it's part of a proof showing that if you have a monic polynomial with all integer coefficients and all the zeros have absolute value 1 then all the zeros are roots of unity.

So say we have our polynomial:

[itex]f(t)=(t-\alpha_1)...(t-\alpha_k)[/itex]

A simple argument is then used to show that you can create new monic integer polynomials from this by raising the alpha's to powers. For example:

[itex]f_m(t)=(t-\alpha^m_1)...(t-\alpha^m_k)[/itex]

Then it's easy to put a finite limit on the the absolute value of the coefficients, from which you get a finite set of inequalities which have a finite set of solutions, and then it is an easy leap to see that there must be two different of these "power polynomials" that are equal, for different m.

So far so good (rushing through the proof here). We then create a permutation function [itex]\pi[/itex] so we end up with for m not equal to g:

[itex]\alpha^m_j = \alpha^g_{\pi (j)}[/itex]

And then comes the next step that I don't really see. I think you only need the above, and not all the background. But my book claims that a simple induction argument gives you from the above that:

[itex]\alpha^{m^r}_j = \alpha^{g^r}_{\pi^r (j)}[/itex]

And I just can't see how to get this. The rest of the proof is also easy. It's just this one step that is bugging me. So I would really appreciate an explanation. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
nevermind, it was trivial. I just had a blind spot.
 
  • #3
Lol I've had those before, It laster much longer and it was much more obvious though. It was proving the identity for cos(x-y) and I couldn't see why the angle between the y angle and x angle was x-y...took me 6 months to realize :D
 

FAQ: Proof of Roots of Unity: Solving a Missing Step

1. What is the "proof of roots of unity" and why is it important?

The proof of roots of unity is a mathematical concept that explains how to find the roots of unity, which are solutions to the equation xn = 1 where n is a positive integer. This concept is important because it has numerous applications in fields such as number theory, algebra, and geometry.

2. How do you solve a missing step in the proof of roots of unity?

To solve a missing step in the proof of roots of unity, you first need to understand the concept of complex numbers and their properties. From there, you can use the properties of complex numbers to manipulate the equation xn = 1 and find the missing step.

3. Are there any shortcuts or tricks to solving a missing step in the proof of roots of unity?

While there are no shortcuts or tricks that can be applied universally to all problems involving the proof of roots of unity, having a thorough understanding of complex numbers and their properties can make the process easier.

4. Can the proof of roots of unity be applied to real-world problems?

Yes, the proof of roots of unity has many real-world applications. For example, it can be used to find the solutions to certain differential equations, to study the behavior of dynamical systems, and to analyze the properties of periodic functions.

5. Are there any common mistakes to avoid when solving a missing step in the proof of roots of unity?

One common mistake to avoid is assuming that the roots of unity are only real numbers. They can also be complex numbers, so it's important to keep an open mind and consider all possibilities when solving a missing step in the proof.

Similar threads

Back
Top