Basic question on spivak's calculus

  • Thread starter Thread starter chemistry1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interpretation of "factorization" as presented in Spivak's calculus, specifically regarding the expression x² - 3x + 2 = (x - 1)(x - 2). Participants clarify that Spivak employs property P9, which states a⋅(b+c) = a⋅b + a⋅c, to demonstrate the development of factors rather than merely presenting a factorization. The conversation also highlights the assumption that x - 1 can be expressed as x + (-1), facilitating the distribution process. Overall, the dialogue emphasizes the relationship between factorization and expansion in algebraic expressions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polynomial factorization
  • Familiarity with algebraic properties, specifically property P9
  • Basic knowledge of distribution in algebra
  • Concept of equivalence in algebraic expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of property P9 in algebraic manipulations
  • Explore the concept of polynomial expansion versus factorization
  • Learn about different methods of factorization in algebra
  • Investigate the role of assumptions in algebraic proofs and justifications
USEFUL FOR

Students of calculus, educators teaching algebraic concepts, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of polynomial factorization and expansion.

chemistry1
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
http://postimg.org/image/lh7ga876t/

Hi, I have a basic question concerning definition of the word 'factorization'. Does Spivak consider factorization as development of factors ? He goes from saying the "factorization" x2−3x+2=(x−1)(x−2) is really a triple use of P9 and goes on showing development.

P9 says : If a,b, and c are any numbers, then : a⋅(b+c)=a⋅b+a⋅c
Also, when Spivak does the following : (x−1)(x−2)=x(x−2)+(−1)(x−2) does he use any property or just assumes it as like this ? I know what's happening, just curious if there's any justification to it.

Thank you !
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
chemistry1 said:
http://postimg.org/image/lh7ga876t/

Hi, I have a basic question concerning definition of the word 'factorization'. Does Spivak consider factorization as development of factors ? He goes from saying the "factorization" x2−3x+2=(x−1)(x−2) is really a triple use of P9 and goes on showing development.

P9 says : If a,b, and c are any numbers, then : a⋅(b+c)=a⋅b+a⋅c
Also, when Spivak does the following : (x−1)(x−2)=x(x−2)+(−1)(x−2) does he use any property or just assumes it as like this ? I know what's happening, just curious if there's any justification to it.

Thank you !
Note: Use the X2 icon for exponents (superscripts).

Here's the image you posted:
attachment.php?attachmentid=65052&stc=1&d=1387849695.jpg

I suppose Spivak does assume that x-1 is the same as x + (-1) .

Then of course, ##\displaystyle\ (x-1)(a)\ ## is equivalent to ##\displaystyle\ x(a)+(-1)(a)\ ## . Correct? (Assuming we can distribute from the left as well as from the right.)

Then just let ##\displaystyle\ a = (x-2) \ ## .
 

Attachments

  • proof.jpg
    proof.jpg
    33.2 KB · Views: 577
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, that I understood. The other thing which I don't understand is why does he talk about using P9 to factorize if he's showing the development of factors. How does it make any sense ?thank you!
 
It looks like he's using P9 to expand (multiply out) the factorized form, (x-1)(x-2), verifying that it is the correct factorization for x2 - 3x + 2 .
 
Yeah, I noticed that. I just was expecting the inverse, the factorization. Anyway, thank you for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K