Is this true: |x|=+-x?

1. Jun 20, 2007

alenglander

I am using CliffsNotes QuickReview Algebra I (which by the way I find to be fantastic, except that it is very prone to typos) to review the algebra that I haven't learned in almost a decade. It says there that (x^2)^1/2 = |x|, but it also says that (x^2)^1/2 = +-x. But isn't it true that |x| > 0? So how can |x| = +-x? Someone please help me understand this. Thanx.

2. Jun 20, 2007

D H

Staff Emeritus
What happens if x is negative?

3. Jun 20, 2007

alenglander

If x is negative then |x| = -x (for example, say x = -3, so |-3| = -(-3) = 3), because the absolute value of a number is always a positive number. But +-x refers to the number you get as a result of putting either a + or a - in front of x. So if x = -3, +-x could equal +(-3) OR -(-3). Only ONE of these is a positive number (-(-3)).

So to use the example of -3, my question is that |-3| = 3, but +-(-3) could equal 3 OR -3, and since 3 obviously does not equal -3, how can you say that |-3| = +-3?

[Sorry if that's a little convoluted. I tried to be clear, but I may not have succeeded.]

4. Jun 20, 2007

morson

The answer to your thread's question is no, if you're considering nonzero x, and if you mean "plus AND minus." Some consider the symbol √x as the principle value of the square roots of x (ie: only the positive square root). Some consider $$x^{\frac{1}{2}$$ to represent BOTH the square roots of x, but I have come to think of them as the same. So, |x| ≠ +-x, if x is nonzero.

Last edited: Jun 20, 2007
5. Jun 20, 2007

alenglander

Thanks morson.

[By the way, how do you insert mathematical symbols into posts like you just did?]

6. Jun 20, 2007

nrqed

No, only one of the signs is allowed, depending on the sign of x. If they wrote $|x| = \pm x$, it was a shorthand for the more completed definition:

OOPS: EDIT: should have been a larger or equal than... I thought that leq was larger or equal but it is less or equal... It's corrected below
$|x| = x \, \rm{if} x \geq 0$

and

$|x| = -x \, \rm{if} x <0$

(the equality case could have been put on either of those or on both since zero does not care about the sign)

Last edited: Jun 21, 2007
7. Jun 20, 2007

alenglander

Umm ... is nrqed disagreeing with morson, or did I just misunderstand someone?

8. Jun 20, 2007

D H

Staff Emeritus
Per your original post, your CliffsNotes say that $$(x^2)^{1/2} = |x|$$ in one place and $$(x^2)^{1/2} = \pm x$$ in another. First, look back at these notes. Does it say that $$\sqrt{x^2} = |x|[/itex] rather than [tex](x^2)^{1/2} = |x|$$?

As morson indicated, $$\sqrt x$$ universally indicates the the principal (i.e., positive) root. If you want to allow negative and positive roots, it is better to use the form $$x^{1/2}$$. As you indicated, the CliffNotes are a bit unreliable.

9. Jun 20, 2007

alenglander

First of all, it does say "square root of x", not (x^2)^1/2, I just haven't figured out yet how to write that with a square root sign!

So according to what you're saying: If I have an equation, say x^2 = y, and I want to solve for x, which means taking the square of both sides, then I need to specify x = "+-(square root of y)" [ahhh!! Somebody tell me how to get math symbols in here!] instead of just "square root of y", since although the first way is technically correct, it is not understood without prefacing the square-root symbol with a "+-". Is that correct?

10. Jun 20, 2007

Vagrant

Click on the square root symbol generated by someone else and that will give you the code. Here it was \sqrt x

11. Jun 20, 2007

cshum00

This is bad though.
|±x| ≠ ±x

The absolute value is defined to always ONLY give positive values.
|±x| = +x

But mathematically, the way to do it is to square it and the take the square root. For |±x| = +x
(±x)2 = +x2 but +x2 ≠ +x so
√(+x2) = +x

So we can define that,
|±x| = √(±x2)

Cliff Notes is wrong that,
|±x| = ±x

But the thing is that, √(±x2) = ±x because
√(±x2) = (√±x)2 and
(√±x)2 = ((±x)2)1/2 = (±x)1

However,
|±x| = √(±x2) = +x but
|±x| ≠ (√±x)2 ≠ ±x

Last edited: Jun 20, 2007
12. Jun 20, 2007

MeJennifer

I have always disagreed with the mathematical definition of the square root being single-valued.
But we have to live with it.

Anyone knows who was the "genius" who came up with that anyway?

13. Jun 20, 2007

cshum00

Well, i also disagree with that but the problem is that we are still unable to prove that √-x = -x. Until you find a prof, we have to stick with it.

14. Jun 20, 2007

MeJennifer

√-x = -x is obviously false.

But at any rate, you cannot prove or disprove the workings of an operator. It is simply a definition.

15. Jun 20, 2007

cshum00

My fault. I thought you were talking about the negative square root; while you meant √(x2) = ±x and not, +x or -x.

16. Jun 21, 2007

nrqed

Sorry. My mistake. I corrected it now. I used the latex "leq" thinking it was larger or equal to but it is for less or equal to. Corrected now. Sorry.

17. Jun 21, 2007

Neutralino

modulus x is always positive yes, but you can replace it with a +-x in calculations i think.

18. Jun 21, 2007

ZioX

Some people like functions to be well defined...

:rofl:

Of course, you could always map it to a 2-tuple, which is what I think you were hinting at. The graphing complications that would naturally arise would make it confusing for a lot of people.

19. Jun 21, 2007

MeJennifer

I don't see what so funny here, the inverse of y = x2 is not a function.

And you think that is a valid argument?

20. Jun 21, 2007

ZioX

Well, I'm not even really sure what you were suggesting. Are you saying sqrt(x) should map to a 2-tuple, namely (sqrt(x),-sqrt(x))?

Besides, what is your argument for even changing it in the first place?