Basic question on spivak's calculus

  • Thread starter Thread starter chemistry1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
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: 602
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!