Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The additive persistence of 2718 is 2: first we find that 2 + 7 + 1 + 8 = 18, and then that 1 + 8 = 9. The multiplicative persistence of 39 is 3, because it takes three steps to reduce 39 to a single digit: 39 → 27 → 14 → 4. Also, 39 is the smallest number of multiplicative persistence 3.
For example, the rhamphoid cusp y 2 = x 5 has a singularity of order 2 at the origin. After blowing up at its singular point it becomes the ordinary cusp y 2 = x 3, which still has multiplicity 2. It is clear that the singularity has improved, since the degree of defining polynomial has decreased. This does not happen in general.
60 = 2 × 2 × 3 × 5, the multiplicity of the prime factor 2 is 2, while the multiplicity of each of the prime factors 3 and 5 is 1. Thus, 60 has four prime factors allowing for multiplicities, but only three distinct prime factors.
The concept of multiplicity is fundamental for Bézout's theorem, as it allows having an equality instead of a much weaker inequality. Intuitively, the multiplicity of a common zero of several polynomials is the number of zeros into which the common zero can split when the coefficients are slightly changed.
The multiplicity of a prime factor p of n is the largest exponent m for which p m divides n. The tables show the multiplicity for each prime factor. If no exponent is written then the multiplicity is 1 (since p = p 1). The multiplicity of a prime which does not divide n may be called 0 or may be considered undefined.
Assume it is an isolated singularity: in the case of holomorphic mappings it is said that a hypersurface singularity is singular at if its gradient is zero at , and it is said that is an isolated singular point if it is the only singular point in a sufficiently small neighbourhood of . In particular, the multiplicity of the gradient
The fundamental theorem of algebra shows that any non-zero polynomial has a number of roots at most equal to its degree, and that the number of roots and the degree are equal when one considers the complex roots (or more generally, the roots in an algebraically closed extension) counted with their multiplicities. [3]
Because of the order of zeros and poles being defined as a non-negative number n and the symmetry between them, it is often useful to consider a pole of order n as a zero of order –n and a zero of order n as a pole of order –n. In this case a point that is neither a pole nor a zero is viewed as a pole (or zero) of order 0.