Results 16 to 18 of 18

- April 22nd 2007, 04:57 PM #16

- April 22nd 2007, 07:17 PM #17

- Joined
- Nov 2005
- From
- someplace
- Posts
- 14,972
- Thanks
- 5

- May 10th 2007, 11:03 AM #18
I wasn't arguing that the r_{x} roots must be 1 (that is that every root must be 1), but that if the roots for the n = k case are r_1, r_2, ..., r_k, where r_1, r_2, ..., r_k are real numbers, and that the first "k" roots of the n = k + 1 case are r_1, r_2, ... , r_k, where r_1, r_2, ..., r_k are the same values from the n = k case, then the r_{k + 1} root must be 1.

[Edit] There is a problem with this logic that just occurred to me: The roots of n = k + 1 don't have to be the same as those of n = k.