Is polynomial in general the same as polynomial function?











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












The algebra text book says, a polynomial in one variable over $mathbb{R}$ is given by,



$f(x)= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + cdots + a_1x + a_0$



Where $x$ is an unknown quantity which commutes with real numbers, called "indeterminate".



So I have a few question,




  1. Is polynomial always a function?if not then what is a polynomial in general?

  2. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?

  3. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
    – Daniel R. Collins
    Nov 17 at 14:10















up vote
4
down vote

favorite












The algebra text book says, a polynomial in one variable over $mathbb{R}$ is given by,



$f(x)= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + cdots + a_1x + a_0$



Where $x$ is an unknown quantity which commutes with real numbers, called "indeterminate".



So I have a few question,




  1. Is polynomial always a function?if not then what is a polynomial in general?

  2. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?

  3. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
    – Daniel R. Collins
    Nov 17 at 14:10













up vote
4
down vote

favorite









up vote
4
down vote

favorite











The algebra text book says, a polynomial in one variable over $mathbb{R}$ is given by,



$f(x)= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + cdots + a_1x + a_0$



Where $x$ is an unknown quantity which commutes with real numbers, called "indeterminate".



So I have a few question,




  1. Is polynomial always a function?if not then what is a polynomial in general?

  2. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?

  3. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?










share|cite|improve this question















The algebra text book says, a polynomial in one variable over $mathbb{R}$ is given by,



$f(x)= a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + cdots + a_1x + a_0$



Where $x$ is an unknown quantity which commutes with real numbers, called "indeterminate".



So I have a few question,




  1. Is polynomial always a function?if not then what is a polynomial in general?

  2. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?

  3. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?







functions polynomials definition






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 17 at 8:54









José Carlos Santos

142k20111207




142k20111207










asked Nov 17 at 8:26









William

1,110314




1,110314












  • Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
    – Daniel R. Collins
    Nov 17 at 14:10


















  • Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
    – Daniel R. Collins
    Nov 17 at 14:10
















Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
– Daniel R. Collins
Nov 17 at 14:10




Can you be more specific in what you mean by "algebra"? At the college level this could be abstract algebra, college algebra, elementary algebra, etc. Can you cite the specific book in use?
– Daniel R. Collins
Nov 17 at 14:10










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










No, a polynomial is not a function. However, for each polynomial $p(x)=a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$ you may consider the polynomial function$$begin{array}{rccc}pcolon&mathbb R&longrightarrow&mathbb R\&x&mapsto&a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n.end{array}$$And distinct polynonials will be associated with dstinct functions. However, although this is true over the reals, it doesn't hold in general. For instance, if you are working over the field $mathbb{F}_2$, then the polynomial $x^2-x$ and th null polynomial are distinct polynmials, but the function$$begin{array}{ccc}mathbb{F}_2&longrightarrow&mathbb{F}_2\x&mapsto&x^2-xend{array}$$is the null function.



So, a polynomial (over the reals) is an expression of the type $a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$, where $x$ is an entity about which all we assume is that it commutes with each real number. Usually, it is called an “indeterminate” since it is not a specific real number.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 8:49










  • In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 8:51












  • oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 9:00






  • 2




    In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 9:12












  • @William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
    – LutzL
    Nov 17 at 15:07




















up vote
7
down vote















  1. Is polynomial always a function?




No, never.





  1. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?




Yes, it is wrong. Formally a polynomial is a sequence $(a_0, a_1, ldots)$ such that $a_i=0$ eventually. It's a sequence of coefficients, it's not a function. Each coefficient is taken from a fixed ring, e.g. reals, complex numbers or finite fields. The underlying ring is also called a ring of scalars. With that we can define a specific polynomial addition, polynomial multiplication and scalar multiplication.





  1. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?




$x$ is simply a special polynomial of the form $(0,1,0,0,ldots)$. It is a theorem that every polynomial can be uniquely written as a finite sum $sum a_ix^i$ with $a_i$ scalars.



It is important to distinguish polynomials from polynomial functions. For example if $K$ is a finite field, i.e. $K={a_1,ldots, a_m}$ then take polynomial $f(X)=(X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)$. For example if $K=mathbb{Z}_2={0,1}$ then that would produce polynomial $(X-1)X=X^2-X=X^2+X$ which formally is $(0,1,1,0,0,ldots)$.



Clearly $f(x)=0$ for all $xin K$ meaning $f$ is a constant $0$ as a function $f:Kto K$. But as a polynomial $f(X)$ is non-zero of positive degree $m$.



Also note that over infintie fields these two coincide. Indeed, there is a ring epimorphism $K[X]to K{X}$ with polynomials on the left side and polynomial functions on the right. The kernel is non-trivial if and only if $K$ is finite. And in that case it is equal to the principal ideal $langle (X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)rangle$.



In particular there are always infinitely many polynomials. But there might be finitely many polynomial functions, depending on the underlying ring of scalars.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 11:05








  • 2




    @William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
    – freakish
    Nov 17 at 11:07













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3002099%2fis-polynomial-in-general-the-same-as-polynomial-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
8
down vote



accepted










No, a polynomial is not a function. However, for each polynomial $p(x)=a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$ you may consider the polynomial function$$begin{array}{rccc}pcolon&mathbb R&longrightarrow&mathbb R\&x&mapsto&a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n.end{array}$$And distinct polynonials will be associated with dstinct functions. However, although this is true over the reals, it doesn't hold in general. For instance, if you are working over the field $mathbb{F}_2$, then the polynomial $x^2-x$ and th null polynomial are distinct polynmials, but the function$$begin{array}{ccc}mathbb{F}_2&longrightarrow&mathbb{F}_2\x&mapsto&x^2-xend{array}$$is the null function.



So, a polynomial (over the reals) is an expression of the type $a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$, where $x$ is an entity about which all we assume is that it commutes with each real number. Usually, it is called an “indeterminate” since it is not a specific real number.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 8:49










  • In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 8:51












  • oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 9:00






  • 2




    In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 9:12












  • @William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
    – LutzL
    Nov 17 at 15:07

















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










No, a polynomial is not a function. However, for each polynomial $p(x)=a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$ you may consider the polynomial function$$begin{array}{rccc}pcolon&mathbb R&longrightarrow&mathbb R\&x&mapsto&a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n.end{array}$$And distinct polynonials will be associated with dstinct functions. However, although this is true over the reals, it doesn't hold in general. For instance, if you are working over the field $mathbb{F}_2$, then the polynomial $x^2-x$ and th null polynomial are distinct polynmials, but the function$$begin{array}{ccc}mathbb{F}_2&longrightarrow&mathbb{F}_2\x&mapsto&x^2-xend{array}$$is the null function.



So, a polynomial (over the reals) is an expression of the type $a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$, where $x$ is an entity about which all we assume is that it commutes with each real number. Usually, it is called an “indeterminate” since it is not a specific real number.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 8:49










  • In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 8:51












  • oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 9:00






  • 2




    In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 9:12












  • @William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
    – LutzL
    Nov 17 at 15:07















up vote
8
down vote



accepted







up vote
8
down vote



accepted






No, a polynomial is not a function. However, for each polynomial $p(x)=a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$ you may consider the polynomial function$$begin{array}{rccc}pcolon&mathbb R&longrightarrow&mathbb R\&x&mapsto&a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n.end{array}$$And distinct polynonials will be associated with dstinct functions. However, although this is true over the reals, it doesn't hold in general. For instance, if you are working over the field $mathbb{F}_2$, then the polynomial $x^2-x$ and th null polynomial are distinct polynmials, but the function$$begin{array}{ccc}mathbb{F}_2&longrightarrow&mathbb{F}_2\x&mapsto&x^2-xend{array}$$is the null function.



So, a polynomial (over the reals) is an expression of the type $a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$, where $x$ is an entity about which all we assume is that it commutes with each real number. Usually, it is called an “indeterminate” since it is not a specific real number.






share|cite|improve this answer












No, a polynomial is not a function. However, for each polynomial $p(x)=a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$ you may consider the polynomial function$$begin{array}{rccc}pcolon&mathbb R&longrightarrow&mathbb R\&x&mapsto&a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n.end{array}$$And distinct polynonials will be associated with dstinct functions. However, although this is true over the reals, it doesn't hold in general. For instance, if you are working over the field $mathbb{F}_2$, then the polynomial $x^2-x$ and th null polynomial are distinct polynmials, but the function$$begin{array}{ccc}mathbb{F}_2&longrightarrow&mathbb{F}_2\x&mapsto&x^2-xend{array}$$is the null function.



So, a polynomial (over the reals) is an expression of the type $a_0+a_1x+cdots+a_nx^n$, where $x$ is an entity about which all we assume is that it commutes with each real number. Usually, it is called an “indeterminate” since it is not a specific real number.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 17 at 8:38









José Carlos Santos

142k20111207




142k20111207












  • Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 8:49










  • In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 8:51












  • oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 9:00






  • 2




    In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 9:12












  • @William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
    – LutzL
    Nov 17 at 15:07




















  • Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 8:49










  • In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 8:51












  • oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 9:00






  • 2




    In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 17 at 9:12












  • @William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
    – LutzL
    Nov 17 at 15:07


















Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
– William
Nov 17 at 8:49




Thank you for writing a simple answer, I don't know what fields or rings are, I have them in the next year. But for the time being, would you be kind enough to explain, or add to your answer, what does the phrase, "over the reals" mean?
– William
Nov 17 at 8:49












In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 8:51






In this context, if I say that I am working over the reals (or over $mathbb R$; you used this expression), what I mean is just that all my $a_i$'s are real numbers. I could alse be working over, say, the complex numbers. Or over the integers.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 8:51














oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
– William
Nov 17 at 9:00




oh, I see, so the coefficients will be from the set of $mathbb{R}$. Another quick question, in any function $f(x)$, we call the $x$ a variable, but the $x$ in polynomials are called indeterminates? Why is that?
– William
Nov 17 at 9:00




2




2




In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 9:12






In functions the $x$ can take any value in the domain. In a polynomial, the $x$ is an indeterminate thing. It is not supposed to be replaced by a number.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 9:12














@William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
– LutzL
Nov 17 at 15:07






@William : The polynomial as algebraic entity is just the finite sequence of coefficients. Writing it as a sum with powers in some $x$ is just another symbolic way to write the coefficient sequence, where the powers indicate the position in the sequence. Of course everything is arranged so that polynomial multiplication etc. works.
– LutzL
Nov 17 at 15:07












up vote
7
down vote















  1. Is polynomial always a function?




No, never.





  1. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?




Yes, it is wrong. Formally a polynomial is a sequence $(a_0, a_1, ldots)$ such that $a_i=0$ eventually. It's a sequence of coefficients, it's not a function. Each coefficient is taken from a fixed ring, e.g. reals, complex numbers or finite fields. The underlying ring is also called a ring of scalars. With that we can define a specific polynomial addition, polynomial multiplication and scalar multiplication.





  1. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?




$x$ is simply a special polynomial of the form $(0,1,0,0,ldots)$. It is a theorem that every polynomial can be uniquely written as a finite sum $sum a_ix^i$ with $a_i$ scalars.



It is important to distinguish polynomials from polynomial functions. For example if $K$ is a finite field, i.e. $K={a_1,ldots, a_m}$ then take polynomial $f(X)=(X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)$. For example if $K=mathbb{Z}_2={0,1}$ then that would produce polynomial $(X-1)X=X^2-X=X^2+X$ which formally is $(0,1,1,0,0,ldots)$.



Clearly $f(x)=0$ for all $xin K$ meaning $f$ is a constant $0$ as a function $f:Kto K$. But as a polynomial $f(X)$ is non-zero of positive degree $m$.



Also note that over infintie fields these two coincide. Indeed, there is a ring epimorphism $K[X]to K{X}$ with polynomials on the left side and polynomial functions on the right. The kernel is non-trivial if and only if $K$ is finite. And in that case it is equal to the principal ideal $langle (X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)rangle$.



In particular there are always infinitely many polynomials. But there might be finitely many polynomial functions, depending on the underlying ring of scalars.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 11:05








  • 2




    @William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
    – freakish
    Nov 17 at 11:07

















up vote
7
down vote















  1. Is polynomial always a function?




No, never.





  1. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?




Yes, it is wrong. Formally a polynomial is a sequence $(a_0, a_1, ldots)$ such that $a_i=0$ eventually. It's a sequence of coefficients, it's not a function. Each coefficient is taken from a fixed ring, e.g. reals, complex numbers or finite fields. The underlying ring is also called a ring of scalars. With that we can define a specific polynomial addition, polynomial multiplication and scalar multiplication.





  1. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?




$x$ is simply a special polynomial of the form $(0,1,0,0,ldots)$. It is a theorem that every polynomial can be uniquely written as a finite sum $sum a_ix^i$ with $a_i$ scalars.



It is important to distinguish polynomials from polynomial functions. For example if $K$ is a finite field, i.e. $K={a_1,ldots, a_m}$ then take polynomial $f(X)=(X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)$. For example if $K=mathbb{Z}_2={0,1}$ then that would produce polynomial $(X-1)X=X^2-X=X^2+X$ which formally is $(0,1,1,0,0,ldots)$.



Clearly $f(x)=0$ for all $xin K$ meaning $f$ is a constant $0$ as a function $f:Kto K$. But as a polynomial $f(X)$ is non-zero of positive degree $m$.



Also note that over infintie fields these two coincide. Indeed, there is a ring epimorphism $K[X]to K{X}$ with polynomials on the left side and polynomial functions on the right. The kernel is non-trivial if and only if $K$ is finite. And in that case it is equal to the principal ideal $langle (X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)rangle$.



In particular there are always infinitely many polynomials. But there might be finitely many polynomial functions, depending on the underlying ring of scalars.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 11:05








  • 2




    @William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
    – freakish
    Nov 17 at 11:07















up vote
7
down vote










up vote
7
down vote











  1. Is polynomial always a function?




No, never.





  1. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?




Yes, it is wrong. Formally a polynomial is a sequence $(a_0, a_1, ldots)$ such that $a_i=0$ eventually. It's a sequence of coefficients, it's not a function. Each coefficient is taken from a fixed ring, e.g. reals, complex numbers or finite fields. The underlying ring is also called a ring of scalars. With that we can define a specific polynomial addition, polynomial multiplication and scalar multiplication.





  1. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?




$x$ is simply a special polynomial of the form $(0,1,0,0,ldots)$. It is a theorem that every polynomial can be uniquely written as a finite sum $sum a_ix^i$ with $a_i$ scalars.



It is important to distinguish polynomials from polynomial functions. For example if $K$ is a finite field, i.e. $K={a_1,ldots, a_m}$ then take polynomial $f(X)=(X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)$. For example if $K=mathbb{Z}_2={0,1}$ then that would produce polynomial $(X-1)X=X^2-X=X^2+X$ which formally is $(0,1,1,0,0,ldots)$.



Clearly $f(x)=0$ for all $xin K$ meaning $f$ is a constant $0$ as a function $f:Kto K$. But as a polynomial $f(X)$ is non-zero of positive degree $m$.



Also note that over infintie fields these two coincide. Indeed, there is a ring epimorphism $K[X]to K{X}$ with polynomials on the left side and polynomial functions on the right. The kernel is non-trivial if and only if $K$ is finite. And in that case it is equal to the principal ideal $langle (X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)rangle$.



In particular there are always infinitely many polynomials. But there might be finitely many polynomial functions, depending on the underlying ring of scalars.






share|cite|improve this answer
















  1. Is polynomial always a function?




No, never.





  1. And what's up with the "indeterminate" thingy? Is it wrong to simply call it a variable?




Yes, it is wrong. Formally a polynomial is a sequence $(a_0, a_1, ldots)$ such that $a_i=0$ eventually. It's a sequence of coefficients, it's not a function. Each coefficient is taken from a fixed ring, e.g. reals, complex numbers or finite fields. The underlying ring is also called a ring of scalars. With that we can define a specific polynomial addition, polynomial multiplication and scalar multiplication.





  1. What exactly is the $x$ in the expression? A number? A matrix? Or...some other object? Why does it have to "commute" with real numbers?




$x$ is simply a special polynomial of the form $(0,1,0,0,ldots)$. It is a theorem that every polynomial can be uniquely written as a finite sum $sum a_ix^i$ with $a_i$ scalars.



It is important to distinguish polynomials from polynomial functions. For example if $K$ is a finite field, i.e. $K={a_1,ldots, a_m}$ then take polynomial $f(X)=(X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)$. For example if $K=mathbb{Z}_2={0,1}$ then that would produce polynomial $(X-1)X=X^2-X=X^2+X$ which formally is $(0,1,1,0,0,ldots)$.



Clearly $f(x)=0$ for all $xin K$ meaning $f$ is a constant $0$ as a function $f:Kto K$. But as a polynomial $f(X)$ is non-zero of positive degree $m$.



Also note that over infintie fields these two coincide. Indeed, there is a ring epimorphism $K[X]to K{X}$ with polynomials on the left side and polynomial functions on the right. The kernel is non-trivial if and only if $K$ is finite. And in that case it is equal to the principal ideal $langle (X-a_1)cdots(X-a_m)rangle$.



In particular there are always infinitely many polynomials. But there might be finitely many polynomial functions, depending on the underlying ring of scalars.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Nov 17 at 10:17

























answered Nov 17 at 8:38









freakish

10.6k1527




10.6k1527












  • Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 11:05








  • 2




    @William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
    – freakish
    Nov 17 at 11:07




















  • Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
    – William
    Nov 17 at 11:05








  • 2




    @William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
    – freakish
    Nov 17 at 11:07


















Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
– William
Nov 17 at 11:05






Thanks for answer, but you know what is actually bothering me? The fact that we use the notation of a function i.e $f(x), g(x)$ etc. to represent polynomials.. would you happen to know why do we represent it like that?
– William
Nov 17 at 11:05






2




2




@William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
– freakish
Nov 17 at 11:07






@William I think this is because of historical reasons. Originally polynomials were indeed understood as polynomial functions. Also it is useful when dealing with polynomials of multiple "variables".
– freakish
Nov 17 at 11:07




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3002099%2fis-polynomial-in-general-the-same-as-polynomial-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

Aardman Animations

Are they similar matrix

“minimization” problem in Euclidean space related to orthonormal basis