How to break it into simple fractures

  • Thread starter Thread starter electron2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Break
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the decomposition of a rational function into partial fractions, specifically the expression \(\frac{1}{s(s^2-1)}\). Participants are examining the values of constants \(A\), \(B\), and \(C\) in the context of this decomposition.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the correct values for \(A\), \(B\), and \(C\) and questioning the original poster's calculations. Some suggest checking the equality of the original expression and the decomposed form to verify correctness. Others propose alternative methods, such as expanding around the poles, to simplify the process.

Discussion Status

There is ongoing exploration of different methods to approach the problem, with some participants providing hints and guidance on correcting the setup of equations. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being discussed, particularly regarding the relationships between \(A\), \(B\), and \(C\).

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original poster's equations may be incorrect, leading to confusion about the values of \(B\) and \(C\). There is also mention of the need for the original poster to provide a complete solution for better assistance.

electron2
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
[tex]\frac{1}{s(s^2-1)}=\frac{A}{s}+\frac{b}{s-1}+\frac{C}{s+1}[/tex]

i get A=-1
B=-C
A+B+C=0

where is the mistake
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We cannot find your mistake if you don't show us your entire solution.
 
How do you know you made a mistake? What did you get for B and C? After you find these values, you should be able to check that the expression on the right side (with numbers substituted for A, B, and C) is equal to 1/(s(s^2 - 1)). If the two expressions are identically equal then your values for A, B, and C are correct. If not, then you made a mistake.
 
The problem lies in the three expressions he has gotten so far. If A=-1 and B=-C then A+B+C=A=0=-1.
 
You can do it faster, without solving any equations, by expanding around the poles. A rational function f(z) with a pole at z = p can be expanded as:

a/(z-p)^n + b/(z-p)^(n-1) + ...

If you add up all the singular terms of all the expansions around all the poles, and call that function you get g(z), then the difference:

h(z) = f(z) - g(z)

doesn't have any poles anymore, therefore it must be a polynomial. If
f(z) tends to zero at inifinty, then so does h(z), because g(z) also tends to zero to infinity. But because h(z) is a polynomial, that means that h(z) = 0, therefore f(z) = g(z).

In the given case, the expansions around the three poles is very easy to obtain. Around s = 0, we have:

f(s) = 1/s [expansion of 1/(s^2 - 1) around s = 0] =

1/s [-1 + O(s)] = -1/s + nonsingular terms.

Around s = 1:

f(s) = 1/(s-1) [expansion of 1/s 1/(s+1) around s = 1] =

1/2 1/(s-1) + nonsingular terms

Around s = -1:

f(s) = 1/(s+1) [expansion of 1/s 1/(s-1) around s = -1] =

1/2 1/(s+1) + nonsingular terms

So, we have:

f(s) = -1/s + 1/2 [1/(s-1) + 1/(s+1)]
 
electron2 said:
[tex]\frac{1}{s(s^2-1)}=\frac{A}{s}+\frac{b}{s-1}+\frac{C}{s+1}[/tex]

i get A=-1
B=-C
A+B+C=0

where is the mistake

Your mistake isn't where you solved for A. It's that you wrote your equations incorrectly. Check here:

[tex]\frac{1}{s(s+1)(s-1)}=\frac{A(s^{2}-1)+B(s^{2}+s)+C(s^{2}-s)}{s(s+1)(s-1)}[/tex]

Now redo your system and you will get A = -1. However, your 2nd and 3rd equations will be different.

Hint: [tex]B \neq -C[/tex]
 
Count Iblis said:
You can do it faster, without solving any equations, by expanding around the poles. A rational function f(z) with a pole at z = p can be expanded as:

a/(z-p)^n + b/(z-p)^(n-1) + ...

If you add up all the singular terms of all the expansions around all the poles, and call that function you get g(z), then the difference:

h(z) = f(z) - g(z)

doesn't have any poles anymore, therefore it must be a polynomial. If
f(z) tends to zero at inifinty, then so does h(z), because g(z) also tends to zero to infinity. But because h(z) is a polynomial, that means that h(z) = 0, therefore f(z) = g(z).

In the given case, the expansions around the three poles is very easy to obtain. Around s = 0, we have:

f(s) = 1/s [expansion of 1/(s^2 - 1) around s = 0] =

1/s [-1 + O(s)] = -1/s + nonsingular terms.

Around s = 1:

f(s) = 1/(s-1) [expansion of 1/s 1/(s+1) around s = 1] =

1/2 1/(s-1) + nonsingular terms

Around s = -1:

f(s) = 1/(s+1) [expansion of 1/s 1/(s-1) around s = -1] =

1/2 1/(s+1) + nonsingular terms

So, we have:

f(s) = -1/s + 1/2 [1/(s-1) + 1/(s+1)]

Haha I think you might have lost him here, as you lost me for a second. The equations become trivial in this case, so it is a bit easier to just set up the system and stare at it. I've never seen that before, but now I'll remember it as an alternative to doing stupid systems.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K