How would you go about solving these set of equations?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nonequilibrium
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a set of three equations involving three variables (x, y, z) expressed in terms of parameters a, b, and c. Participants explore methods to rewrite these equations, potentially transforming them into linear forms or finding solutions through substitutions and manipulations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests an elegant solution by drawing an analogy to a simpler set of equations, proposing to rewrite the original equations in a linear form.
  • Another participant proposes substituting two variables to express everything in terms of a third variable, suggesting a method to derive an equation solely in terms of z.
  • A third participant presents a manipulation involving multiplying one of the equations by z and substituting into another equation to derive a cubic equation.
  • A later reply expresses appreciation for the method suggested by another participant, indicating it aligns with their expectations for solving the equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple approaches to solving the equations, indicating that there is no single agreed-upon method. The discussion remains open with various proposed techniques and no consensus on a definitive solution.

Contextual Notes

Participants do not resolve the mathematical steps completely, and the discussion includes various assumptions about the methods and transformations used. The dependence on specific substitutions and manipulations is noted but not fully explored.

nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
Say you have a set of equations of the form
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}<br /> x+y+z &amp;=a \\<br /> xy + xz + yz &amp;= b \\<br /> xyz &amp;= c<br /> \end{array} \right.
(for clarity: I'm working over the regular numbers)
how would you go about solving it elegantly? (or at least rewriting it as linear equations)

I'm thinking of something analogous to how you can solve
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}<br /> x+y &amp;=a \\<br /> xy &amp;= b<br /> \end{array} \right.
namely by noting that (x-y)² = (x+y)² - 4xy = a² - 4b (and after taking the square root we're left with two good ol' linear equations, i.e. x+y=... and x-y=..., a form which I regard as "being solved")
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
mr. vodka said:
Say you have a set of equations of the form
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}<br /> x+y+z &amp;=a \\<br /> xy + xz + yz &amp;= b \\<br /> xyz &amp;= c<br /> \end{array} \right.
(for clarity: I'm working over the regular numbers)
how would you go about solving it elegantly? (or at least rewriting it as linear equations)

I'm thinking of something analogous to how you can solve
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}<br /> x+y &amp;=a \\<br /> xy &amp;= b<br /> \end{array} \right.
namely by noting that (x-y)² = (x+y)² - 4xy = a² - 4b (and after taking the square root we're left with two good ol' linear equations, i.e. x+y=... and x-y=..., a form which I regard as "being solved")

Hey mr. vodka.

Have you tried just subsituting two of the variables to get the whole thing in a third one?

So for example you could everything in terms of z by taking (1) to get x = a - y - z and taking (2) to get y = (b - xz)(x + z) and then plug in (1) and (2) and simplify to get an equation for (3) giving z = c/xy where you get an expression in terms of only z.

You could do it in more than one way (this is only one possible way), but then you would end up with some kind of equation and at the worst you can use a root-finding algorithm, and probably use a few transformations to get the thing in surd form if it exists (using your ideas in your original post).
 
Call the equations 1, 2 and 3

Multiply 2 by z

xyz+xz2+yz2=bz

Subtract 3

(x+y)z2 = bz-c

Substitute into 1

(bz-c)/z2+z=a

Can you take the cubic from there?
 
Last edited:
Thank you both for your trouble. Studiot's method was more like something I was looking for, thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K