Polynomial Divided by (x-1)(x-2): Remainder & Why

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xalos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial
AI Thread Summary
When dividing a polynomial P(x) by (x-1) and (x-2), the remainders are 2 and 3, respectively. This implies that P(x) must be quadratic, as the degree of the remainder must be lower than that of the divisor. By setting up equations based on the remainders, it can be determined that the polynomial can be expressed in terms of coefficients a, b, and c. The critical division reveals that despite initial assumptions about the polynomial's form, the consistent remainders indicate a specific relationship among the coefficients. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the importance of recognizing polynomial degree constraints in remainder problems.
Xalos
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Suppose a polynomial is divided by (x-1) and remainder=2 and when the same polynomial is divided by (x-2), remainder is 3. What is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by (x-1)(x-2)? Why?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
This may seem vague, but a remainder may either be a constant, or the degree in the numerator is lower than the degree in the denominator.

You can start with:
P(x) = D(x)Q(x) + R(x),
where P(x) is your polynomial and your dividend, D(x) is your divisor which might be a binomial or trinomial, Q(x) is the quotient, and R(x) is the remainder.

I worked your problem and it should not be too complicated. You should understand something about using synthetic division to obtain points of the polynomial. If you divide using synthetic division and you obtain a nonzero remainder, then the divisor number and the remainder will give you a point on the polynomial. If the root used is a and the remainder is b, then a point on the polynomial is (a, b).
 
Xalos said:
Suppose a polynomial is divided by (x-1) and remainder=2 and when the same polynomial is divided by (x-2), remainder is 3. What is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by (x-1)(x-2)? Why?

You know three things:

Since the polynomial, P(x), divided by x-1, has a numeric remainder, it must be quadratic, of the form ax2+ bx+ c.

Since the remainder, when divided by x-1, is 2, P(1)= a+ b+ c= 2.

Since the remainder, when divided by x-2, is 3, P(2)= 4a+ 2b+ c= 3.

Subtracting the first equation from the second gives 3a+ b= 1 so b= 1- 3a. Putting that into the first equation, a+ 1- 3a+ c= 2 or -2a+ c= 1 so c= 1+ 2a.

Now, divide ax2+ (1-3a)x+ 1+ 2a by (x-1)(x-2)= x2+ 3x+ 2.
 
Thanx! It didn't occur to me that p(x) couldn't be anything other than quadratic.
 
Actually, I wrote out a long response arguing that this was a bad problem because there were too many possibilities and the couldn't all give the same remainder.

Until I did the critical division at the end and found out they did!
 
HallsofIvy said:
Actually, I wrote out a long response arguing that this was a bad problem because there were too many possibilities and the couldn't all give the same remainder.

Until I did the critical division at the end and found out they did!

You could show us what you were writing anyway. The reason I might like to read it is that I did not make any assumptions about the initial unknown polynomial, and then I found a non-polynomial result (a binomial, in fact). I would try to be clear about what assumption I did make that I should not have made; or what assumption I should have made that I did not. My result was that P(x)= ( x+1). Not a bad result but it is not a polynomial. The division process lead only to a remainder, and no other coefficients. Should I have understood that I must expect at least a quadratic degree polynomial?
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top