MHB Is This the Right Way to Solve a Quadratic Equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Casio1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quadratic
Casio1
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone(Wink)

I have an equation which looks like quadratic to me.

2(x - 5)2 = 32

Can I divide both sides by 2?

(x - 5)2 = 16

Can I take the square root?

x - 5 = + or - 4

if x = 5 plus 4 = 9

if x = 5 - 4 = 1

Therefore my roots would be;

x = 9 or x = 1

Is this method acceptable and the correct way to find the values of x. I know it works out OK but am wondering about the way I have done it?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi Casio!

(Yes) Well done. That's exactly how you should do this problem every step of the way.
 
Yes, that is a perfectly valid procedure. All of your steps are correct. (Nod)
 
After dividing by 2, we may also arrange as the difference of squares:

(x - 5)2 - 42 = 0

((x - 5) + 4)((x - 5) - 4) = 0

(x - 1)(x - 9) = 0

x = 1, 9
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top