MHB Find Polynomial Roots: x4-2x3-25x2+50x

  • Thread starter Thread starter theakdad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial Roots
theakdad
Messages
210
Reaction score
0
I have to find all solutions for X when:
x4-2x3-25x2+50x

I have done it so,but I am not sure if this is ok:

x(x3-2x2-25x+50)

= x(x2(x-2)-25(x+2)
= x(x2-25)(x-2)
=x(x-5)(x+5)(x-2)

Now i see that root/zeroes are +5,-5 and 2. I know that this polynomial has another zero that is 0,but how do i know that? Because x is in the front? Or did i make a mistake and should such problems deal another way? Thank you for all replies!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
wishmaster said:
I have to find all solutions for X when:
x4-2x3-25x2+50x

I have done it so,but I am not sure if this is ok:

x(x3-2x2-25x+50)

= x(x2(x-2)-25(x-2))
= x(x2-25)(x-2)
=x(x-5)(x+5)(x-2)

Now i see that root/zeroes are +5,-5 and 2. I know that this polynomial has another zero that is 0,but how do i know that? Because x is in the front? Or did i make a mistake and should such problems deal another way? Thank you for all replies!

You had a minor typo in your working which did not affect the outcome. I have highlighted it in red, but is is obvious from your subsequent steps that you intended to write this. The four roots of the polynomial are found by equating each of the four factors to zero, including the factor $x$ in front, and solving for $x$. So you are correct that the four roots are (in ascending order):

$$x=-5,\,0,\,2,\,5$$

Great job! :D
 
MarkFL said:
You had a minor typo in your working which did not affect the outcome. I have highlighted it in red, but is is obvious from your subsequent steps that you intended to write this. The four roots of the polynomial are found by equating each of the four factors to zero, including the factor $x$ in front, and solving for $x$. So you are correct that the four roots are (in ascending order):

$$x=-5,\,0,\,2,\,5$$

Great job! :D

Thank you! Sorry,that was a type mismatch.
one question,when x stays alone in front of other terms,then this root is always zero?
 
wishmaster said:
Thank you! Sorry,that was a type mismatch.
one question,when x stays alone in front of other terms,then this root is always zero?

Yes, equating that factor to zero, we get:

$$x=0$$

It is already solved for $x$, and it tells us that $x=0$ is a root.
 
wishmaster said:
Thank you! Sorry,that was a type mismatch.
one question,when x stays alone in front of other terms,then this root is always zero?
Another way to se it if we want to divide by x Then we get 2 case
case 1 $$x=0$$
put $$x=0$$ to the equation and we see that $$0=0$$ hence 0 is a root
case 2 $$x \neq 0$$
we know can divide by x (we get third degree polynom) and now it's just to use rational root Theorem and long polynom division and Then it becomes second grade polynom which is easy to solve

Regards,
$$|\pi\rangle$$
 
wishmaster said:
x4-2x3-25x2+50x

=x(x-5)(x+5)(x-2)
To be specific we have that if ab = 0 then either a = 0 or b = 0. In this case that means when
x(x - 5)(x + 5)(x - 2) = 0

we get solutions when:
x = 0, or x - 5 = 0, or x + 5 = 0, or x - 2 = 0

The solutions to these four equations are your roots.

-Dan
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top