I don't understand partial fraction decomposition

iScience
Messages
466
Reaction score
5
if there is something like (x^2+3x+6) in the denominator for one of the terms in a partial fraction problem, why do we put Ax+B instead of just A? and if the denominator is (x^2+3x+6)^2, why do we do {(Ax+B)/(x^2+3x+6)}+{(Cx+D)/(x^2+3x+6)^2}? i was always just told to memorize it, but why do we set it up this way? even a link to a derivation will probably help. the only thing i can find online is the formulas, basically what i just wrote.. but i want to know why those setups are the way they are, ie the reason behind them.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Have you thought about the simplest cases? Suppose your initial fraction is just (4x- 2)/(x^2+ 3x+ 6). Do you think you ought to be able to write that as A/(x^2+ 3x+ 6)? What would have happened to the "4x"?
 
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