Find the remainder of a division

AI Thread Summary
To find the remainder of polynomial divisions, the remainder R(x) must be of lower degree than the divisor U(x). For the first division, U(x) is x^2 - 1, which has roots at 1 and -1, allowing the determination of R(x) as a linear function. Evaluating the original polynomial P(x) at these roots provides the necessary values to solve for the coefficients of R(x). The same approach applies to the second division, where the remainder can also be expressed in a linear form. Understanding the relationship between P(x), U(x), and R(x) is crucial for accurately finding the remainder.
pixel01
Messages
688
Reaction score
1
Hi all!

Could anyone help telling me the way to find the remainder of the following divisions:

1. (x^2006+x^1996+x^1981+x+1):(x^2-1)

2. (x2+x3+x5+1) : [(x-1)(x-2)]

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Saying that "P(x) divided by U(x) is equal to quotient Q(x) with remainder R(x) means that P(x)= U(x)*Q(x)+ R(x)." Of course, R(x) has lower degree than U(x) so that, for example, if U is linear, then R(x)= r, a number. In both of your examples, U(x) is quadratic so R(x) is linear. It is also true that, if U(a)= 0 then P(a)= R(a).

So: for the first problem, Q(x)= x2- 1 which has zeroes 1 and -1. You know that the remainder is a linear function, R(x)= ax+ b, such that R(1)= 1^2006+1^1996+1^1981+1+1= ? and R(-1)= (-1)^2006+(-1)^1996+(-1)^1981+(-1)+1= ?. Two points are sufficient to determine a and b. Same idea for the second problem.
 
HallsofIvy said:
...
So: for the first problem, Q(x)= x2- 1 which has zeroes 1 and -1. You know that the remainder is a linear function, R(x)= ax+ b, such that R(1)= 1^2006+1^1996+1^1981+1+1= ? and R(-1)= (-1)^2006+(-1)^1996+(-1)^1981+(-1)+1= ?. Two points are sufficient to determine a and b. Same idea for the second problem.


There may be a mistake in your reasoning. U(x) equals x^2-1 which has two roots at 1 and -1, not Q(x).
 
There is a typo in his reasoning, not a mistake. Substitute Q(x) with U(x) in Hall's write-up. It doesn't matter what Q(x) is. It is just some polynomial. If U(x) is zero for some particular value of x, the product Q(x)*U(x) will also be zero at that value of x.

For a polynomial divided by a quadratic, you know that the remainder R(x) must be of the form ax+b. Since P(x) = Q(x)*U(x) + R(x), P(x) and R(X) must be equal at the zeros of U(x). Evaluating P(x) at the the zeros of U(x) provides the information needed to deduce the form of R(x).
 
Oh, now I've got to the point:
P(x) - R(x)=U(x).Q(x)
At x=1 and x=-1, the left-hand side equals zero ..

Thank you HallsofIvy and DH.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
47
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top