Originally Posted by

**arithmo** No matter your response was an error you pointed out a very important issue:

***************

There's a good reason why that "does not appear in the math literature"- its *not* true! That's an "upper triangular" matrix. If you "expand by the first column", repeatedly, you can show that the determinant of any triangular determinant is just the product of the numbers on the main diagonal. The determinant does not involve "x" at all. it is x_1(x_2)(x_3)\cdot\cdot\\cdot x_n

***************

You said that it does not appear in the literature because it was false.

So, now that you realized it is true and so simple, and considering your True-False argument for analyzing math objects then:

Why this matrix appear does not appear in the math literature?

Notice that the determinant yields the general algebraic equation, and the matrix is based on new extremely simple high-order root-approximating methods that

also do not appear in the math literature and could be developed by any inexperienced young student, even by children.

Regards,

Domingo Gomez Morin