B Intermediate Value Theorem and Synthetic Division

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the application of the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT) to determine if the polynomial equation has a real solution between the points (7/2) and (9/2). Evaluating the polynomial at these points yields positive results, indicating that the IVT does not guarantee a zero exists between them. Synthetic division is explored as an alternative method, confirming that the remainder from this process corresponds to the function's value at the evaluated points. However, it is clarified that while the remainder indicates the sign of the function at those points, it does not provide information about the sign of the entire quotient. Ultimately, both methods yield consistent results regarding the sign of the polynomial at the specified x-values.
opus
Gold Member
Messages
717
Reaction score
131
Say I have a given problem that states:

Does the Intermediate Value Theorem guarantee that the following equation has a real solution between ##(\frac{7}{2})## and ##(\frac{9}{2})##?
$$3x^4-27x^3+177x^2+1347x+420=0$$

Now what I want to do is determine the sign of x=##(\frac{7}{2})## and x=##(\frac{9}{2})## at the given equation.

I can do this two ways: one way is to just evaluate ##f(7/2)## and ##f(9/2)##. This gives two positive results, so the Intermediate Value Theorem cannot guarantee that there's a zero between these points. This leads me into my fist question:
1) In plugging the two given x values into the given equation, the left side does not equal zero. So this is telling me that the two given x values are not solutions to the equation (meaning the graph doesn't cross the x-axis at these points). However there is a point where the graph does have the x-value of x=##(\frac{7}{2})## and x=##(\frac{9}{2})## and at these points, the graph is positive. Is this a true statement?

Another way to do this is to use synthetic division, dividing the polynomial by k=##(7/2)## and k=##(9/2)## This works because of the Remainder Theorem- where if we divide a polynomial ##p(x)## by ##(x-k)##, the remainder is ##p(k)##. Since x=k, we find the value of the function ##3x^4-27x^3+177x^2+1347x+420=0## evaluated at x=##(\frac{7}{2})## and x=##(\frac{9}{2})##. In this case, the remainders are both positive, and is the second part of my question.

When dividing polynomials, if the remainder is positive, does that mean that the entire quotient is positive? In other words, if the final digit in the synthetic division is positive, is the entire quotient positive? This question doesn't seem very intuitive to me as it's not with concrete number values, but with expressions with variables and graphs that can fluctuate between positive and negative values.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
1) Yes.

2) No. The quotient is a polynomial, plus a fraction whose denominator is the factor ##(x-k)##. In particular, if your synthetic division is:
$$\begin{array}{r|rrrrr}\frac{7}{2} & 3 & -27 & 177 & 1347 & 420\\ & & \frac{21}{2} & -\frac{231}{4} & \frac{3339}{8} & \frac{98805}{16}\\\hline & 3 & -\frac{33}{2} & \frac{477}{4} & \frac{14115}{8} & \frac{105525}{16}\end{array}$$
then the quotient only means that, when ##\left(x - \frac{7}{2}\right)## is not 0,
$$3x^4 - 27x^3 + 177x^2 + 1347x + 420 = \left(x - \frac{7}{2}\right)\left(3x^3 - \frac{33}{2}x^2 + \frac{477}{4}x + \frac{14115}{8} + \frac{105525}{16\left(x - \frac{7}{2}\right)}\right)$$
The quotient is meaningless when ##x = k##, since in that particular case, you would be attempting to divide by ##0##. So no information about the sign of the original polynomial can be retrieved this way, without doing a lot more work than just finding the value of the original polynomial when ##x = k## manually.
 
  • Like
Likes opus
Thank you for that response. I also didn't know you can write synthetic division out here, so I'll keep that in mind for asking better questions next time.

So for the second part, to try to summarize, can we say that we use synthetic division because in dividing a polynomial by ##(x-k)##, the remainder is equal to ##f(k)## which will give the same solution if were were to just plug in the x=k into the function and evaluate it that way? So in both instances, we are getting the same solution, so the sign of the remainder in synthetic division, is the same sign as the x=k evaluated with the function?

I'm trying to word this in a way that it makes clear how I'm thinking about it. But ideally I want to point at things and speak about them, which is not possible through typing obviously. So I hope what I've said makes sense.
 
You've got it. You can use the remainder to find the sign of f(k), since the remainder is f(k), but not necessarily the sign of the quotient, which depends on the value of x.
 
  • Like
Likes opus
Thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes slider142
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top