The FibonacciChebyshev connection
Sounds like a lurid headline: "Investigators probe FibonacciChebyshev connection!" Fibonacci (Leonardo of Pisa, or Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci, 11701250) is famous for his mathematical work, which predated the printing press. The sequence named for him arose from a question he posed with regard to the reproduction of rabbits.
Pafnuty Lvovich Chebyshev, May 4 [May 16, New Style], 1821, Okatovo, Russia — November 26 [December 8], 1894, St. Petersburg, was a Russian mathematician, known for his work on the distribution of prime numbers, and also in real analysis. Obviously, the two men never met. They worked in different areas of mathematics. And yet, there is a connection between things named for them. On the one hand, we have the Fibonacci numbers. We can generalize these as follows: If a and b are integers, the quadratic polynomial x^2  a*x + b gives rise to two integer sequences (*F) F[sub]n[/sub]: F[sub]0[/sub] = 0, F[sub]1[/sub] = 1, F[sub]n+2[/sub] = a*F[sub]n+1[/sub]  b*F[sub]n[/sub] (*L) L[sub]n[/sub]: L[sub]0[/sub] = 2, L[sub]1[/sub] = a, L[sub]n+2[/sub] = a*L[sub]n+1[/sub]  b*L[sub]n[/sub] If the quadratic factors as (x  r)*(x  r') we may write these as (**) F[sub]n[/sub] = (r^n  r'^n)/(r  r'). and L[sub]n[/sub] = r^n + r'^n. These sequences are generalizations of the Fibonacci and Lucas numbers; they are polynomials in a and b. Where's the connection to Chebyshev? Well, once upon a time, long long ago, I was thinking about "reciprocal polynomials" F(z), for which F(z) = z^n*F(1/z), where n is the degree of F(z). It is easy to see that, if n is odd, then F(1) = 0; so, with irreducibility in mind, we assume that n is even, n = 2*k. Clearly the lead coefficient is 1. The quadratic case is F(z) = z^2  a*z + 1, which is irreducible for integers a other than 2 or 2. Anyway, it seemed clear to me (as I'm sure has been known for centuries) that F(z)/z^k can be expressed as a polynomial in X = z + 1/z. All that is needed is to express z^n + 1/z^n as a polynomial in z + 1/z, z^n + 1/z^n = T[sub]n[/sub](z + 1/z) = T[sub]n[/sub](X) That this is possible is easily shown by induction, using T[sub]0[/sub](X) = 2, T[sub]1[/sub](X) = X, and (z^n + 1/z^n)*(z + 1/z) = z^(n+1) + 1/z^(n+1) + z^(n1) + 1/z^(n1), or T[sub]n+1[/sub](X) = X*T[sub]n[/sub](X)  T[sub]n1[/sub](X). We have T[sub]0[/sub](X) = 2, T[sub]1[/sub](X) = X, T[sub]2[/sub](X) = X^2  2, T[sub]3[/sub](X) = X^3  3*X, etc This is a sequence of monic polynomials with integer coefficients. Now, I was sure that these polynomials had been well known for a long time, but how? Then, it suddenly occurred to me: If you take z = exp(i*t), z + 1/z = 2*cos(t) and z^n + 1/z^n = 2*cos(n*t). That is, T[sub]n[/sub](2*cos(t)) = 2*cos(n*t). In other words, the T[sub]n[/sub](X) are (up to a change of scale and a constant multiplier) "Chebyshev polynomials of the first kind." They give the sequence L[sub]n[/sub] for the quadratic x^2  X*x + 1. The sequence F[sub]n[/sub] obviously gives the polynomials in X = z + 1/z for (z^n  1/z^n)/(z  1/z), which with z = exp(i*t) becomes sin(n*t)/sin(t). Thus, for the quadratic x^2  X*x + 1, the sequence F[sub]n[/sub] expresses sin(n*t)/sin(t) as polynomials in 2*cos(t). These are also monic with integer coefficients. They are (up to a change of scale and a constant multiplier) the "Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind." We have F[sub]0[/sub](X) = 0, F[sub]1[/sub](X) = 1, F[sub]2[/sub](X) = X, F[sub]3[/sub](X) = X^2  1, etc. Now, what happens if the constant term 1 is replaced by another constant b? As (*F) and (*L) show, we obtain a sequence of polynomials in two variables. One also has r' = b/r in (**), and we can write r + r' = sqrt(b)*(r/sqrt(b) + sqrt(b)/r). The (perhaps) most curious case is b = 1. In this case, the effect is simply to change the (rescaled) Chebyshev polynomials T[sub]n[/sub] and F[sub]n[/sub] by making all the coefficients positive. These (particularly the transformed F[sub]n[/sub]) are called the "Fibonacci polynomials," giving the formulas in (*L) and (*F) with b = 1 for x^2  a*x  1. Notes: The (rescaled) Chebyshev polynomials above allow very simple proofs by induction, that cos(n*t) is a polynomial with rational coefficients in cos(t), and that sin(n*t) is sin(t) times a polynomial in cos(t). The coefficients of the (rescaled) Chebyshev polynomials may easily be found using the well known power series method on the secondorder differential equation satisfied by the cosine, to develop a recursion relation. The formulas (*) give (perhaps) interesting composition formulas. Let n = a*b. Then T[sub]n[/sub](X) = T[sub]a[/sub](T[sub]b[/sub](X)), and F[sub]n[/sub](X) = F[sub]a[/sub](T[sub]b[/sub](X))*F[sub]b[/sub](X) [strike]F[sub]a[/sub](X*F[sub]b[/sub](X))*F[sub]b[/sub](X)[/strike]. 
[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;462874]...Clearly the lead coefficient is 1...[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure I follow you there... 
[QUOTE=Nick;462881](Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus)[quote]
...Clearly the lead coefficient is 1...[/quote] I'm not sure I follow you there...[/QUOTE] That's because I didn't state my hypotheses clearly :blush: It's clearly true if the reciprocal polynomial F(z) is irreducible in Q[x] and has degree greater than 1. In this case, the zeroes occur in reciprocal pairs, so the constant term is 1. The lead coefficient is therefore also 1. 
[QUOTE=Nick;462881]Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus[Quote]...Clearly the lead coefficient is 1...[/quote]I'm not sure I follow you there...[/QUOTE]
[After a decent amount of sleep] Fascinating, how I messed that up. I didn't even mean to post that last response. I must have hit "Submit reply" by mistake... What [i]is[/i] clear about a reciprocal polynomial, is that the lead coefficient is equal to the constant term. [The coefficients of any two terms of complementary degree are always equal.] Beyond that... well, the zero polynomial is a reciprocal polynomial, and there's no way to make [i]its[/i] lead coefficient equal to 1. So, you have to assume F(z) is not the zero polynomial. Given that, you can, of course, always [i]assume[/i] it's monic, since it will have a nonzero lead coefficient, and you can just divide by it. And [i]then[/i], F(z) has lead coefficient and constant term both equal to 1. But that's not really what I had in mind. I'm only interested here in monic polynomials with integer coefficients. And there's no way around having to [i]assume[/i] that F(z) is monic with integer coefficients  after all, e.g. z^2  (5/2)*z + 1 is a reciprocal polynomial. 
It's a nice tale!
Perhaps it would be a good idea to consider the link to the fundamental theorem of symmetric polynomials. 
[QUOTE=Nick;463003]It's a nice tale![/quote]Thanks for the kind words!
[quote]Perhaps it would be a good idea to consider the link to the fundamental theorem of symmetric polynomials.[/QUOTE] Hmm. The expressions (**) in the OP clearly are symmetric in r and r', so by that theorem, are expressible as polynomials in the coefficients (which, for a monic polynomial F(z)) are, up to sign, the elementary symmetric polynomials in the roots of F(z) = 0. (If F(z) isn't monic, you have to divide by the lead coefficient to get the elementary symmetric polynomials.) The expression for L[sub]n[/sub] obviously generalizes to polynomials of any degree; the sum of the n[sup]th[/sup] powers of the roots of a monic polynomial in Z[x] forms a sequence of integers with interesting divisibility properties; perhaps the best known case with degree greater than 2 is Perrin's sequence for x[sup]3[/sup]  x  1. The sum of the n[sup]th[/sup] powers of the roots is the subject of Newton's identities, which I invite the interested reader to look up. 
About Tn+1(X) = X*Tn(X)  Tn1(X) , the Book of HC Williams dedicated to Édouard Lucas talks about it. I'm not at home and cannot provide more information for now.

All times are UTC. The time now is 18:40. 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000  2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.