One of the exercises this week asked for a proof of linear independence for the set
inside the polynomials with real coefficients. However, note that the polynomials here are regarded as *functions* from
to
. Thus, it amounts to showing that if
as a function, then all have to be zero. This does require proof. One quick way to do this is to note that all polynomial functions are differentiable. And if
is the zero function, then so are all its derivatives. In particular,
for all . But
Thus,
for all
.
One possible reason for confusion is that there is another ‘formal’ definition of by simply identifying a polynomial with its sequence of coefficients. That is, you can think of an element of
as a function
that has *finite support* in that
for all but finitely many
. With this definition, the polynomial
becomes identified with the function
that sends
to 1 and everything else to zero. If you take this approach, the linear independence also becomes formal. But in this problem, you are defining
as a function in its variable. This of course is the natural definition you’ve been familiar with at least since secondary school.
Here are two questions:
1. If you think of two polynomials and
as functions from
to
with finite support, what is a nice way to write the product
?
2. What is the advantage of this formal definition?