Quadratic inequalities for complex variables?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the properties of quadratic inequalities involving complex variables, specifically regarding a quadratic function where λ is asserted to be real. It is noted that if the inequality holds for all real λ, then the quadratic has no real roots, implying that the roots must be complex or purely imaginary. The participants clarify that a quadratic with real coefficients will have no real roots if its discriminant is negative. This condition ensures that the solutions include an imaginary component. Understanding these properties is crucial for analyzing quadratic inequalities in the context of complex variables.
mathsciguy
Messages
134
Reaction score
1
Hello, I was looking at Riley's solution manual for this specific problem. Along the way, he ended up with a quadratic inequality:

View attachment how.bmp

If you looked at the image, he said it is given that λ is real, but he asserted that λ has no real roots because of the inequality. Doesn't that mean λ is imaginary or complex in some points then, contradicting his first statement? I reckon this has something to do with the properties of a quadratic inequality for complex variables.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
mathsciguy said:
Hello, I was looking at Riley's solution manual for this specific problem. Along the way, he ended up with a quadratic inequality:

View attachment 61729

If you looked at the image, he said it is given that λ is real, but he asserted that λ has no real roots because of the inequality. Doesn't that mean λ is imaginary or complex in some points then, contradicting his first statement? I reckon this has something to do with the properties of a quadratic inequality for complex variables.

\lambda doesn't have roots; it's an arbitrary real number. The quadratic P: z \mapsto az^2 + bz + c has roots, which are those z \in \mathbb{C} for which P(z) = 0. The point is that if P(\lambda) > 0 for all real \lambda then P has no real roots, because if z is real then P(z) \neq 0 and z cannot be a root of P.
 
That's cool, I get it now. Then that means the roots are either purely imaginary or complex (but not purely real) right? Then why is it required that the discriminant be less than zero? Is it because it will make sure that part of the solution will have an imaginary part?
 
Last edited:
mathsciguy said:
That's cool, I get it now. Then that means the roots are either purely imaginary or complex (but not purely real) right? Then why is it required that the discriminant be less than zero? Is it because it will make sure that part of the solution will have an imaginary part?

Yes. A quadratic with real coefficients has no real roots if and only if the discriminant is negative.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top