Is it theoretically possible to find g(x) from this equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zomboy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the theoretical possibility of deriving g(x) from the equation (x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = g(y,z). It highlights the confusion arising from the notation, as g(x) is a function of one variable while g(y,z) is a function of two variables, making it impossible to equate them directly. The equation suggests that g(x) and g(y,z) must be treated as different functions, leading to the conclusion that a valid g(x) does not exist in this context. The conversation also emphasizes that if g(x) were to depend on all three variables, the equation would only hold under specific conditions. Ultimately, the problem presented lacks a sensible solution as initially stated.
Zomboy
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Is it theoretically possible to find "g(x)" from this equation?

So through my workings on this question I came up with this equation:

(x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = g(y,z)

* where g(x) is some function of x and g(y,z) is some function of y and z

I'd like to derive g(x) from this although I get the feeling that it simply can't be done. Can say a function of (x,y,z) + a function of (x) ever give you a function of (y,z)? Why can't you do this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


Your notation is bad. When you write g(x), it implies that is a function in one variable. But g(y,z) is a function of two variables. This is impossible.
 


Are you saying the g(x) and g(y,z) are different functions (in which case, you shouldn't use the same letter!) or that g(y,z) is "the same function as g(x) except using two variables" (which is meaningless).
 


Furthermore, (x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x is a function of three variables, x, y, and z.
 


Notation is bad, but we should be able to interpret g(x) and g(y,z) as two different functions, the point being that the first depends only on x, while the latter depends on y and z.

Such a g(x) does btw not exist in your particular case. For example, y=z=0 gives g(x)=x+C, and y=1,z=0, gives g(x)=x2+x+D, where C and D are some constants.
Can say a function of (x,y,z) + a function of (x) ever give you a function of (y,z)?
Yes, trivially, for example (x+y+z) + (-x) = (y+z).
 


Well, if you meant that g(x) and g(y,z) are different functions, then you would get:
(x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = h(y,z)
Its partial derivative with respect to x is:
2xyz-2xy^2-1+g'(x)=0

Since this is an expression with y and z in it, this means that there is no such g'(x) that depends only on x.

So we have to assume that you actually meant g(x,y,z) with depends on all of them.
In that case, you get:
$$2xyz-2xy^2-1+{\partial g \over \partial x}(x,y,z)={\partial g \over \partial x}(x,y,z)$$

But then, this would only be true if ##2xyz-2xy^2-1=0##.

So the question becomes: what did you actually mean?
The problem that you state has no sensible solution however it was meant.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K