Basic question on spivak's calculus

  • Thread starter Thread starter chemistry1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 2K views
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: 600
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!
 
Yeah, I noticed that. I just was expecting the inverse, the factorization. Anyway, thank you for the help!