The Polynomial That Stays Small on Integers
Let be a polynomial of degree with leading coefficient (i.e., monic). Prove that
In other words, no monic degree- polynomial can be uniformly small on the integers .
Answer: The Polynomial That Stays Small on Integers
Key Idea / Intuition
The integers give us points, and a monic degree- polynomial is completely pinned by its values there — in fact, the unique monic degree- polynomial that passes through prescribed values at is determined by the Newton forward difference formula. The key insight is that the leading coefficient of a monic polynomial forces a specific alternating sum of its values at these integer points to equal exactly , so those values can't all be small.
Formal Proof / Solution
Step 1: The finite difference operator.
Define the -th finite difference of any function at by
A key fact from finite difference calculus: if is a polynomial of degree with leading coefficient , then
Quick proof: It suffices to check on the basis . One can show and for .
Step 2: Apply to our monic polynomial.
Since is monic of degree , we have , so
Step 3: Bound via the maximum.
Let . Then by the triangle inequality:
Step 4: Conclude.
Rearranging gives
Sharpness: The bound is essentially achieved by the polynomial ... more precisely, the Chebyshev-like polynomial on comes close. A clean equality case is (adjusted), but note is already monic of degree and since vanishes at all of ... wait, . So itself achieves the bound with equality: . The bound is non-trivial precisely because we're claiming is a lower bound, and exceeds it.
Source: Classical Putnam/olympiad folklore; related to Putnam techniques on polynomial lower bounds