Introduction: The purpose of this investigation is to find all the roots of a second and third degree polynomial graphically

and extend this information to polynomials of higher degrees. A quadratic, a polynomial of second degree may intersect the x-axis twice, once or never depending on its vertical translation. According to De Moivres theorem, a polynomial equation of nth degree will have exactly n roots. So a quadratic that never touches the xaxis still would have two roots, except that they would be imaginary zeroes (involving i, where i = ). Similarly, a quadratic that only intersects the x-axis once has one real root and one complex root (0i), whereas a quadratic that intersects the x-axis twice has two real roots and no complex roots. In this investigation, the method of shadow functions will be used to find the imaginary zeroes of second and third degree polynomials, using only the graph. Quadratic polynomials In order to establish a relationship between a function and its shadow function, consider a general quadratic function:

In this case, the quadratic will never touch the x-axis since there is an upward vertical translation of b2, except for when b=0, which would mean that is no upward translation. The vertex in this case is a critical minimum point, since the function has positive concavity. This vertex can be found easily using differential calculus.

However since it is a critical point, the first derivative must equal 0.

Therefore, substituting in for x=a gives a y-value of b2. The coordinates of the vertex are therefore (a, b2). This can be confirmed by actually graphing the general function for various values of a and b.

Figure 1: Since a = 1 and b = 2, the coordinates of the vertex are (1, 4), which follows the general form (a, b2)

Figure 2: Again the vertex is in the form (a, b2), for a = 3 and b = -2. Also to note that a negative b value still results in a positive y-value as it is squared.

Since the function is concave up (positive concavity), it only has complex roots unless when b = 0 in which case it would only have one real root (i.e. x = a). In order to prove that complex roots exist for b 0, the general form of the quadratic equation will be tested for zeroes.

When the quadratic intersects the x-axis, the y-coordinate is 0.

Figure 3: Solving (in WolframAlpha) for the roots of the general equation

, where a = 1, and b = 2, satisfies the general solution to the roots

The shadow function of y1 is another quadratic function y2 which has opposite concavity to that of y1. However, it shares the same vertex as y1. Therefore, b2 will have the same sign as before, only (x - a)2 would become (x - a)2 in order to account for the concavity change while still maintaining the same vertex. Therefore, when function would be evaluate this assertion.

, a shadow

. Consider the following examples in order to

Figure 4: Equations of the general form

and

are

graphed for values of a = 1 and b = 2 and it can be seen that they are the exact opposite of each other, while still sharing the same vertex.

Figure 5: Graphing y1 and y2 when a = -3 and b = 1

Figure 6: Graphing y1 and y2 for the special case a = 0 and b = 0, resulting in two parabolas with the same vertex but different concavity.

Figure 7: For a = 7 and b = -3, the general form of the equations again produces two graphs with same horizontal and vertical translation, but opposite concavity.

Figure 7: Demonstrates the relationship between y1, y2 and ym. Ym is known as the shadow generating function. This acts like a mirror in order to reflect the original function over to create what is known as a shadow function. The shadow generating function passes through all the points of intersections. In the case of quadratics, there is only intersection, specifically the vertex and therefore the shadow generating function always passes through the vertex running parallel to the x-axis. Since it parallel to the xaxis, this equation would be of the form where b2 is just the y-coordinate of the vertex. Also, since the general forms of the original and shadow functions are given and the equation for the shadow generating function is figured out, it will be easy to establish a formal proof for the general relationship between y1, y2 and ym. Formal Proof (using Linear System of Equations)

Rearranging and substituting in

, the relationship obtained is as follows:

In order to actually verify this relationship, data collected using Geogebra will be tested to check if it satisfies the relationship or not.

As it can be observed from the data observed, it does follow a pattern and the established conjecture does satisfy all the data collected. Thus, it would be safe to state that

for all quadratics. Figuring out the complex roots of y1 from the graph of y2

Cubic Functions Given a cubic function

, its shadow function must

have opposite concavity, which implies a negative sign, and its zeroes are -2, 5 and 1. Using this information given, the point(s) of intersection between y1 and y2 can be figured out.

)(

Therefore, the points of intersection are (-2, 0) and (3, 20). These points of intersections will then be connected by a line in order to create the shadow generating function ym, which will be used to reflect the original function in order to create a shadow function. The equation of the shadow generating function in this case can be found very easily using WolframAlpha.

This result can also be expressed as will be discussed later on.

. The significance of writing it in this form

Based on the results of this specific case, attempting to use the general statement formed for quadratics and check to see if it satisfies the cubic case as well.

L.H.S. ( ( )( )

R.H.S. )( )

Since L.H.S. = R.H.S., the general statement for polynomials of 2nd degree also holds true for this specific example of a 3rd degree polynomial. But it is obviously necessary to see if this conjecture always holds true for 3rd degree polynomials or are there any special cases. Based on the situation given (refer to point of intersection working), for a 3rd degree polynomial, the general form of y1 and y2 can be written as follows:

In order to find a general form for ym, it be useful to find the points of intersection at first.

Therefore, the two points have general form (a, 0) and (b, c2(b-a)). The equation of the line can be found easily using WolframAlpha.

This can also written as Formal Proof (Using Systems)

Rearranging and substituting in

, the relationship obtained is as follows:

In order to identify any special cases, functions will be entered in their general forms and sliders will be used to change a, b and c.

Figure 8: When a = -2, b = 3 and c = 2. It can also be seen that follows the established general form of

which

Figure 9: when a = b, it is obvious from the general form of the equations that the graphs will only have one point of intersection, and therefore, this case does not satisfy the established conjecture as ym is undefined, irrespective of what the c value is.

Figure 10: When a = b and c=0, there is only point of intersection and both the original and shadow functions only have one real root. When a b and c=0, the graphs will have two points of intersection and both graphs will have two real zeroes, a and b. The zeroes in this case are also the points of intersections and ym = 0, since both points of intersections are zeroes. This can be visually understood in figure 11 below. The only difference between being that figure 10 does not satisfy the general relationship established where figure 11 does, but still is something to point out since all roots are real zeroes.

Figure 12: shows the relationship between y1, y2 and ym. It can be seen from the various values of a, b and c that y1+2 is always double ym, except for the exception when a=b, which has already being explained. Finding Complex zeroes using the shadow function graphically

Applications to Quartics In the case of quartics, two cases have to be considered, an original function with 2 complex roots or an original function with four complex roots. Consider one with 4 complex roots:

or this can also be written as:

As it can be seen just by looking at the graph, y1 and y2 are not shadow functions of each other for each point x, therefore it does not satisfy the general relationship, and thus also the general statement

The second case would be a quartic 2 real and 2 complex roots as follows:

and its shadow function would be:

An example of such a function can be seen in figure 13 below:

Conclusion The purpose of this investigation was to use shadow functions to help identify the zeroes on a graph for a function with complex zeroes. For quadratics and cubics, a identical relationship was established. For quartics, this relationship can extended further and modified in terms of the monomials and quadratic involved in order to establish a shadow function.