High School Missing Solutions and non-reversible operations

  • Thread starter Thread starter FAS1998
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operations
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on how to handle missing solutions in equations involving non-reversible operations. It emphasizes the importance of verifying that found solutions are valid for the original equation, as operations like squaring can introduce extraneous solutions. Dividing by variables that could be zero is highlighted as a common mistake that can lead to missing solutions. The conversation also touches on the limitations of functions like sine, which are not one-to-one and can lead to overlooked solutions if not handled carefully. Ultimately, understanding reversible versus non-reversible operations is crucial in accurately solving equations.
FAS1998
Messages
49
Reaction score
1
How do we deal with missing solutions when we have to solve equations with non-reversible operations? You can always check the solutions to see if solutions are extraneous or not, but how do we know weather or not there are missing solutions to the problem?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Do you have any examples for clarification? Are you talking about a problem where more than 1 solution exists? Or are you referring to a problem where you don't know if a solution exists, or something entirely different?
 
  • Like
Likes FAS1998
FAS1998 said:
How do we deal with missing solutions when we have to solve equations with non-reversible operations?
You deal with them by checking that the values you found are actually solutions to the original equation. If you perform operations such as squaring both sides of an equation, there might be extraneous solutions, which won't be solutions of the original equation.

You shouldn't really have "missing" solutions, unless you do things like dividing both sides by a variable whose value could possibly be zero. For example, if you have the equation ##x^2 = x##, it is tempting to divide both sides by x, getting the equation x = 1. That's not the smartest way to solve this equation, though. It's better to rewrite it as ##x^2 - x = 0##, and then factor the left side to ##x(x - 1) = 0##, from which you can obtain both solutions.

Another example is the equation ##\sin(x) = \frac 1 2##. If you naively apply the function ##\sin^{-1}## to both sides, you end up with ##x = \frac \pi 6##. Doing this, you miss out on ##x = \frac{11\pi} 6##, not to mention an infinite number of other solutions.
 
  • Like
Likes scottdave and FAS1998
Mark44 said:
You deal with them by checking that the values you found are actually solutions to the original equation. If you perform operations such as squaring both sides of an equation, there might be extraneous solutions, which won't be solutions of the original equation.

You shouldn't really have "missing" solutions, unless you do things like dividing both sides by a variable whose value could possibly be zero. For example, if you have the equation ##x^2 = x##, it is tempting to divide both sides by x, getting the equation x = 1. That's not the smartest way to solve this equation, though. It's better to rewrite it as ##x^2 - x = 0##, and then factor the left side to ##x(x - 1) = 0##, from which you can obtain both solutions.

Another example is the equation ##\sin(x) = \frac 1 2##. If you naively apply the function ##\sin^{-1}## to both sides, you end up with ##x = \frac \pi 6##. Doing this, you miss out on ##x = \frac{11\pi} 6##, not to mention an infinite number of other solutions.
What do you mean by “things like” dividing by a variable that could be 0? The reason that I would have thought that dividing by a variable and using sin^-1 on both sides of an equation were “unsafe” is because neither are reversible operations. And I can’t think of a good example off the top of my head, but I feel like irreversible operations aren’t always avoidable.
 
FAS1998 said:
What do you mean by “things like” dividing by a variable that could be 0?
Or dividing by, say, x - 1 if x might be 1. There are lots of possibilities.

FAS1998 said:
The reason that I would have thought that dividing by a variable and using sin^-1 on both sides of an equation were “unsafe” is because neither are reversible operations.
You can always divide both sides of an equation by any nonzero quantity, but if you divide by a variable that could possibly be zero, then it's possible to lose solutions. The ##\sin## function is not 1-to-1, so it doesn't have an inverse that is itself a function. (We can, however, limit the domain such that ##\sin## is 1-to-1, but I wasn't doing that in the example I gave.)
FAS1998 said:
And I can’t think of a good example off the top of my head, but I feel like irreversible operations aren’t always avoidable.
I can't think of any examples where you can't determine whether the operation is reversible. There are relatively few things that you can do to both sides of an equation: add/subtract the same quantity, multiply both sides by the same nonzero quantity, divide both sides by the same nonzero quantity, apply some function to both sides. If the function is 1-to-1 (i.e., has an inverse), then the step is reversible, and you won't have extraneous solutions or missing solutions.
 
Mark44 said:
add/subtract the same quantity, multiply both sides by the same nonzero quantity, divide both sides by the same nonzero quantity, apply some function to both sides
I might add one to the list: substitution. Given any equation f=g involving well formed formulae f and g and given the equality x=y for variables (or well formed formulae that place no restrictions on the domain of their free variables) x and y, one can freely replace any occurrence of x in either f or g with y to obtain f'=g'.

Of course there are also the algebraic manipulations permitted by the rules of the algebra. Associativity, commutativity, distributive law, cancellation of inverses, things like that. But those tend to be trivially reversible and are barely worth mentioning.

Then too, from the definition of equality, one gets the ability to assert x=x at any time.
 
Last edited:
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 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K