Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Statement

Notation (p. 125): f(z)=∏ν=1n(z−zν)f(z)=\prod_{\nu=1}^n(z-z_\nu) is the paper's polynomial (1), written ∏(x−xν)\prod(x-x_\nu) when only real variables occur; E=E(f)E=E(f) is the set where ∣f(z)∣<1|f(z)|<1; LL is the real axis and I=[−1,1]I=[-1,1].

Theorem 1 (p. 126). "Let the zeros xνx_\nu of the polynomial (1) lie in II, and let their centroid xˉ\bar x lie in [0,1][0,1]. Then the set E∩LE\cap L contains an interval JJ which contains the open interval (0,1)(0,1); moreover, the interval JJ contains at least n/2n/2 of the xνx_\nu, and ∣J∣≥2|J|\geq\sqrt2. On the other hand, the set EE does not meet the interval (−∞,−2](-\infty,-\sqrt2]."

The paper places the theorem after two earlier facts it cites (p. 126): ∣E∩I∣≥1|E\cap I|\ge1 for zeros on II, with equality only for (x±1)n(x\pm1)^n (its reference [2], p. 957), and the result of Steinberg and others (its [7]) that EE contains one of the open halves (−1,0)(-1,0), (0,1)(0,1) of II. Theorem 1 names the half: the one on the side of the centroid. The paper remarks (p. 126) that the half of II holding at least half of the zeros need not lie in EE, by the example (x−1)(x+1/4)2(x-1)(x+1/4)^2.

Source. P. Erdős, F. Herzog, G. Piranian, Metric properties of polynomials, J. Analyse Math. 6 (1958), 125--148, doi:10.1007/BF02790232; Theorem 1 on p. 126, its proof on pp. 126--128. The copy read is identified on the source card.

Read depth. Claims checked: the statement was read clause by clause on the page image of p. 126 on 2026-10-08; the proof was read for structure, not checked. Nothing here is independently reviewed.

Proof pointer

Pages 126--128. The function F(x)=1n∑∣x−xν∣F(x)=\frac1n\sum|x-x_\nu| is convex with F(0)≤1F(0)\le1 and F(1)=1−xˉ≤1F(1)=1-\bar x\le1; outside the trivial case f=(x2−1)pf=(x^2-1)^p (where E∩LE\cap L is two open intervals of length 2\sqrt2 each), F<1F<1 on (0,1)(0,1), and the inequality of the arithmetic and geometric means gives ∣f∣<1|f|<1 there. With the zeros ordered decreasingly, FF is least at some xhx_h with h>n/2h>n/2, so [xh,1)⊂E[x_h,1)\subset E too, and JJ is the component of E∩LE\cap L holding both. The bound on ∣J∣|J| comes from two comparisons that can only shrink JJ: the zeros inside JJ are first merged at their centroid and then moved to 11, and the resulting polynomial is below 11 at 2\sqrt2 because more than half of its zeros sit at 11. The last clause uses the paper's inequality (2), ∣f(x)∣≥∣x−1∣λ∣x+1∣n−λ|f(x)|\ge|x-1|^\lambda|x+1|^{n-\lambda} for ∣x∣>1|x|>1 with λ/n=(1+xˉ)/2\lambda/n=(1+\bar x)/2, a consequence of the concavity of log⁡\log, evaluated at x=−2x=-\sqrt2 with λ≥n/2\lambda\ge n/2.

Dependencies

None within the paper. Inequality (2) of this proof is reused for Theorem 2 (p. 129), and Theorem 1 itself in the proof of Theorem 3 (p. 132).

Bears on

  • #1038: for zeros in [−1,1][-1,1], J⊂E∩LJ\subset E\cap L gives ∣E∩L∣≥2|E\cap L|\ge\sqrt2 when the centroid is in [0,1][0,1], and the substitution x↦−xx\mapsto-x (with the sign (−1)n(-1)^n that keeps the polynomial monic) covers the other case, so the infimum the problem asks for is at least 2\sqrt2. This consequence is drawn here; the paper does not state it. The paper's own remarks on that infimum are on Problem 1.