How to solve equations of the form (a*x+b)^(1/2)+(m*x+n)^(1/2)=c

  • Thread starter Thread starter Storm Butler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form
AI Thread Summary
To solve equations of the form (a*x+b)^(1/2)+(m*x+n)^(1/2)=c, start by isolating one of the square root terms. After squaring both sides, linear terms remain alongside square root terms, complicating the solution. Continue squaring the equation to eliminate the square roots, leading to a polynomial equation. Expand and rearrange the resulting equation into standard quadratic form to find the roots. Finally, substitute the roots back into the original equation to verify their validity.
Storm Butler
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I was wondering how you would go about solving for x in an equation like \sqrt{ax+b}+\sqrt{mx+n}=C (where a,b,m, and n are constant numbers). The problem is if you square the expression you just end up with some linear terms multiplied by terms to the power of 1/2. If you keep squaring you never get rid of them. So how do you go about solving something like this?

Thanks for any help
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
(a*x+b)^(1/2)+(m*x+n)^(1/2)=c
(a*x+b)+(m*x+n)+2*[(a*x+b)*(m*x+n)]^(1/2)=c²
2*[(a*x+b)*(m*x+n)]^(1/2)=c² -(a*x+b)-(m*x+n)
4*(a*x+b)*(m*x+n)=[c² -(a*x+b)-(m*x+n)]²
Expand and solve (...)*x²+(...)*x+(...)=0
Then bring back the roots x into the first equation in order to check if each root is valid or not.
 
After squaring both sides, move all the terms without square root on one side and leave the square root alone on the other side (of the equal sign). Then square again.
 
Thank you. I just kept trying to simplify the left hand after squaring, i didnt even think about moving everything over. I feel kind of silly now.
 
Storm Butler said:
Thank you. I just kept trying to simplify the left hand after squaring, i didnt even think about moving everything over. I feel kind of silly now.
Welcome to the club!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top