In Linear Algebra Done Right, Axler proves the following theorem:
Suppose $a_0,a_1,\dots,a_m \in F$. If $a_0+a_1 z+⋯+a_mz^m=0$ for every $z \in F$, then $a_0, \dots, a_m = 0$.
by contrapositive.
He starts his proof by letting $z$ (the input to the polynomial) equal
$$ \frac{|a_0| + |a_1| + \cdots +|a_{m-1}|}{|a_m|} + 1. $$
He then goes on to show that $ |a_0 + a_1 z + \cdots +a_{m-1} z^{m-1}| < |a_m z^m| $ by stating two successive inequalities,
$$ \begin{eqnarray} |a_0 + a_1 z + \cdots +a_{m-1} z^{m-1}| & \leq & (|a_0| + |a_1| + \cdots +|a_{m-1}|) z^{m-1} \\ & \lt & |a_m z^m|. \end{eqnarray} $$
While I understand why this proves the theorem, I don't understand:
- Why he chose $z$ equal to the above fraction as opposed to an arbitrary element of $F$? Is its value being used by either of the above two inequalities? It doesn't seem to be on the surface.
- Why it's guaranteed that $ (|a_0| + |a_1| + \cdots +|a_{m-1}|) z^{m-1} \lt |a_m z^m| $ given that some $ a_0, \dots, a_{m-1} $ may be non-zero.
I know that this previously unanswered question asks similar questions but I think/hope I've provided more specific questions regarding the proof.