- #1

- 572

- 86

This seems to just be the quadratic formula in a transposed way.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

In summary, the conversation discusses a new technique for solving quadratic equations, which involves finding the sum of the roots and saying that they are equidistant from half the sum. This technique is similar to completing the square and has benefits such as connecting it to the axis of symmetry and introducing substitution of variables. Some participants have used this technique in the past and find it helpful, while others prefer the traditional algebraic method.

- #1

- 572

- 86

This seems to just be the quadratic formula in a transposed way.

Mathematics news on Phys.org

- #2

Mentor

- 14,597

- 8,784

The is not unlike a similar symmetry found in complex roots of a polynomial being equally spaced about a circle in the complex plane aka DeMoivre’s theorem.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Moivre's_formula

i remember using the symmetry in a test because i couldn't remember the formula but did have one real root of the 5th order polynomial and we were to graph the solution.

- #3

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Gold Member

- 8,223

- 3,822

- #4

Mentor

- 14,597

- 8,784

When I learned to factor they didnt teach that instead you were looking for two numbers which summed correctly and when multiplied got the c term. It seems that root summing symmetry gets you to an answer more quickly.

- #5

Mentor

- 37,350

- 9,534

The technique described is not really all that different from what happens in the technique of completing the square. Let's look at an example, such as solving the equation ##x^2 - 4x - 5 = 0##jedishrfu said:The difference I see though is going to the sum and saying the roots are equidistant from half the sum.

If we approach this using completing the square, we have

##x^2 - 4x = 5##

##x^2 - 4x + 4 = 5 + 4##

##(x - 2)^2 = 9##

So either x - 2 = 3 or x - 2 = -3, producing the solutions x = 5 or x = -1.

The only difference I see is the substitution of ##u## for ##x - 2##, so ##u^2 = 9 \Rightarrow u = \pm 3##.

Undo the substitution, and you get the same solutions I showed.

- #6

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Gold Member

- 8,223

- 3,822

It seems like a geometric interpretation of the algebraic process of completing the square. I find the algebraic process to be direct enough that a geometric interpretation is only distracting. But people who are not as comfortable with the algebraic process might benefit from a geometric interpretation.Mark44 said:The technique described is not really all that different from what happens in the technique of completing the square.

- #7

Science Advisor

- 2,797

- 21

I wouldn't want to fully replace teaching completing the square though, as that's also very useful for things other than solving quadratics. For example putting an integral like this one into a more amenable form.

[tex] \int \frac{1}{x^2 - 2x + 10} \, dx = \int \frac{1}{(x-1)^2 + 3^2} \,dx[/tex]

BTW. I've used this technique many times in the past. Usually in the context of students first learning to factorize simple integer coeff quadratics in the form [itex]x^2 + bx + c[/itex] with the old "sum = b and product = c" method.

After giving the usual simple exercises like [itex]x^2 + 8x + 15\,[/itex] or [itex]x^2 + 5x + 6[/itex], better students will sometimes ask, "what if you just cannot find any two such numbers with the required sum and product?". The answer I give is that either no such numbers exist (no real roots) or that they exist but are surds and hence more difficult to find. I give an example like [itex]x^2 + 6x +7\,[/itex] and tell them to try (-3+s) and (-3-s), where "s" is the surd to be determined. I never realized I'd found a "new process".

- #8

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 7,223

- 1,740

I found the simple geometric method to be extremely helpful, to ME at least, if not to other people.FactChecker said:I find the algebraic process to be direct enough that a geometric interpretation is only distracting. But people who are not as comfortable with the algebraic process might benefit from a geometric interpretation.

- #9

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Gold Member

- 8,223

- 3,822

I'll buy that.symbolipoint said:I found the simple geometric method to be extremely helpful, to ME at least, if not to other people.

Share:

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 677

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 766

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 720

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 747

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 808

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 906

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 822

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 578

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 676