Concept Decomposing of Partial Fractions

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the process of decomposing partial fractions and the reasoning behind equating coefficients. It explains that when decomposing a fraction, repeating terms like (x-2) is necessary to account for the multiplicity of roots, which ensures the correct form of the decomposition. The participants clarify that the numerator's degree must be less than the denominator's degree, which allows for a more general representation. Additionally, equating coefficients works because it establishes that two polynomial expressions are equivalent for all values of x, leading to the conclusion that corresponding coefficients must be equal. Understanding these concepts is crucial for mastering partial fraction decomposition in algebra.
babby
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have a few questions about decomposing partial fractions. I know how to solve these problems, but I just don't understand why I'm doing some of the things.

1. Why does equating coefficients work? I don't understand the idea behind it.

2. When you are decomposing fractions into constants

EX:

1/(x-1)(x-2)^2 = A/(x-1) + B/(x-2) + C/(x-2)^2

Why do you have to repeat (x-2), instead of just putting B/(x-2)^2?

Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You could, instead, do this:
\frac{A}{x-1} + \frac{Bx+C}{(x-2)^2}.
The point is that the numerator can be anything with degree less than the degree of the denominator.
 
g_edgar said:
You could, instead, do this:
\frac{A}{x-1} + \frac{Bx+C}{(x-2)^2}.
The point is that the numerator can be anything with degree less than the degree of the denominator.

Ah, that was what I was originally thinking, but forgot the variable. But is there a reason why you have to repeat the function when doing it the other way? I don't understand how it works. Is it because the first part of the function:

B/(x-2) eliminates the need for a numerator with one degree less than the denominator seen in

C/(x-2)^2?
 
OK, I understand that part now, but I have another question:

Can somebody explain to me why equating coefficients work?

Example:
8x^3+13x = Ax^3 + 2Ax + Bx^2 + 2B + Cx + D

expanded into:

8x^3 + 13x = Ax^3 + Bx^2 + (2A+C)x + 2(B+D)

where A,B,C,D are constants.

Why does 8 = A; 0 = B; 13 = 2A + C; etc.

I know they have same power variables, but why does this actually work? Thanks!
 
The technique involves the assumption that for the correct values of unknowns such as A, B, and C, both sides of the equation are equivalent for all x. This assmption would still hold after manipulation to put both sides in polynomial form. It should be obvious that two polynomial functions of x are equal for all x if the corresponding coefficients are equal.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
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...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top