How Do You Solve for x in Terms of y for Quadratic and Higher Order Polynomials?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jules18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quadratic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on solving for x in terms of y using the quadratic formula for the equation y = 2x² + x. It is established that there is no true inverse function for this quadratic equation due to the presence of multiple x values for certain y values. The quadratic formula is applied, leading to the expression x = (-1 ± √(1 + 8y)) / 4. Additionally, the conversation touches on higher-order polynomials, noting that while there are general formulas for cubics and quartics, they are complex and no general solution exists for polynomials of degree higher than four using only algebraic functions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the quadratic formula: x = (-b ± √(b² - 4ac)) / (2a)
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
  • Familiarity with polynomial functions and their properties
  • Knowledge of inverse functions and their conditions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the quadratic formula on inverse functions
  • Learn about polynomial equations of degree higher than four and their unsolvability
  • Explore domain restrictions for functions to create valid inverses
  • Investigate the general formulas for cubic and quartic equations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding polynomial equations and their inverses, particularly in the context of quadratic and higher-order functions.

Jules18
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
How do you explicitly solve for x in terms of y using this quadratic formula?

y = 2x2 + x

I need to solve for x in order to find the inverse fxn. I know how to factor, but after that I'm stuck.
Any suggestions?

~Jules~


* And what about polynomials of a higher order, like x3 + 2x2 + x, or something similar?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jules18 said:
How do you explicitly solve for x in terms of y using this quadratic formula?

y = 2x2 + x
There is no inverse function for y = 2x^2 + x. For some values of y there are more than one value of x (eg. y = 0 or y = 1). So you cannot express x in terms of y.

AM
 
Jules18 said:
How do you explicitly solve for x in terms of y using this quadratic formula?

y = 2x2 + x

I need to solve for x in order to find the inverse fxn. I know how to factor, but after that I'm stuck.
Any suggestions?

~Jules~


* And what about polynomials of a higher order, like x3 + 2x2 + x, or something similar?
Are you not aware of the quadratic formula? If ax^2+ bx+ c= 0 then x= (-b\pm\sqrt{b^2- 4ac})/(2a).

In particular, if y= 2x^2+ x then 2x^2+ x- y= 0 so
\frac{-1\pm\sqrt{1+8y}}{4}

It is that \pm that prevents this from being a "true" inverse, as Andrew Mason said. We could divide y into two functions, restricting the domain:

If f_1(x)= 2x^2+ x for -\infty< x\le -1/4 then
f_1^{-1}(x)= \frac{-1-\sqrt{1+8x}{4}

If f_2(x)= 2x^2+ x[/itex] for -1/4\le x&amp;lt; \infty then<br /> f_2^{-1}(x)= \frac{-1+ \sqrt{1+8x}{4}<br /> <br /> There is a general formula for cubics and quartics but they are extremely complicated. It can be shown that cannot be a general formula solve polynomial equations of degree higher than four using only algebraic functions.
 
Relativistic Momentum, Mass, and Energy Momentum and mass (...), the classic equations for conserving momentum and energy are not adequate for the analysis of high-speed collisions. (...) The momentum of a particle moving with velocity ##v## is given by $$p=\cfrac{mv}{\sqrt{1-(v^2/c^2)}}\qquad{R-10}$$ ENERGY In relativistic mechanics, as in classic mechanics, the net force on a particle is equal to the time rate of change of the momentum of the particle. Considering one-dimensional...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K