Talk:Fundamental theorem of algebra

Is it really necessary to define 'zero' as the root of an equation? It demands the reader to distinguish a 'zero' from the number zero, because in the current version of the article the 'zero' is defined as the x where f(x)=0 (zero). Is it an idea to get rid of this demand placed on the reader, by using the word 'root' instead of 'zero' here? Bob.v.R (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I suppose you're right, so go ahead and change it. It's certainly equally accurate, and if you think it's simpler, then there's absolutely no problem. I agree that the meanings of zero may be confusing to a person whose native language is not English. --Qmwne235 (talk) 03:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Somewhere in the next days I will change it. Bob.v.R (talk) 01:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Analysis

That the theorem will always need an element of analysis, the definition of real numbers and continuity of polynomials, does not change that this is a theorem of algebra. The slant towards analysis is a little bit out of proportion. And anyways, there is already a fundamental theorem of analysis, which is that the derivative of the anti-derivative of a continuous function is again that function.--LutzL (talk) 11:05, 31 October 2013 (UTC)