Confused with the answer<> seems correct buttht's wrong wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter vkash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confused
vkash
Messages
316
Reaction score
1
confused with the answer<> seems correct buttht's wrong wrong??

question is
find solution
sqrt(x+1)-sqrt(x-1)=sqrt(4x-1)
sqrt(x+1)-sqrt(x-1)=sqrt(4x-1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (1)
squaring both sides
(x+1)+(x-1)-2*sqrt(x2-1)=4x-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (2)
solving and rearranging
1-2x=2*sqrt(x2-1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -(3)
once again squaring both sides;
1-4x= -4
x=5/4;
But it does not satisfy the first equation.
it also doesn't satisfying equation number three, Is it reason for this?
If yes then why it is so?>?>?>?>?>?>(this is my question)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


Are you sure that your solution doesn't satisfy those equations? When you take the square root of a number, how many solutions do you get?
 


You seem to have started with an equation that doesn't have any real solutions. Let's consider a simpler problem: Find all real numbers x such that ##\sqrt x =-1##. If you square both sides, you get x=1. But x=1 doesn't satisfy the original equation, since ##\sqrt 1=1\neq -1##.

By squaring both sides, we only proved that if ##\sqrt x=-1##, then ##x=1##. This is an implication, not an equivalence, since x=1 doesn't imply ##\sqrt x=-1##. So we can't conclude that x=1. We can only conclude that there are no solutions with x≠1.
 


jamesrc said:
Are you sure that your solution doesn't satisfy those equations? When you take the square root of a number, how many solutions do you get?
I'm not sure where you're going with this question.

When you take the square root of a number, you get one value. Were you going to suggest that there are two?
 


vkash said:
question is

sqrt(x+1)-sqrt(x-1)=sqrt(4x-1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (1)
squaring both sides
(x+1)+(x-1)-2*sqrt(x2-1)=4x-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (2)
solving and rearranging
1-2x=2*sqrt(x2-1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -(3)
once again squaring both sides;
1-4x= -4
x=5/4;
But it does not satisfy the first equation.
it also doesn't satisfying equation number three, Is it reason for this?
If yes then why it is so?>?>?>?>?>?>(this is my question)
Equation (3) lhs = -3/2, rhs = 3/2, so the squares are =, which is the source of your problem.
 


thanks to all of you;
i have got the point of error.
squaring add some extra answers to our solutions...
 
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...
Back
Top