Dank2
- 213
- 4
Homework Statement
p(x) = 0.2*(x-1)^5,
q(x) = 4x-6
The Attempt at a Solution
I took the diffrence h(x) = p(x) - q(x)
h'(x) = ((x-1)^4) - 4
got two solutions for h'(x)=0.
Dank2 said:Homework Statement
p(x) = 0.2*(x-1)^5,
q(x) = 4x-6
The Attempt at a Solution
I took the diffrence h(x) = p(x) - q(x)
h'(x) = ((x-1)^4) - 4
got two solutions for h'(x)=0.
Dank2 said:Homework Statement
p(x) = 0.2*(x-1)^5,
q(x) = 4x-6
The Attempt at a Solution
I took the diffrence h(x) = p(x) - q(x)
h'(x) = ((x-1)^4) - 4
got two solutions for h'(x)=0.
cant get clean solutionsMath_QED said:I believe you are doing something wrong here. You have to prove that the line ## y_1 = 4x - 6## intersects with ##y_2 = \frac{1}{5}(x-1)^5##. What does this mean? You have to find the points ##x## for which ##y_1## = ##y_2##. Thus, we set ##y_1 = y_2## and solve for ##x##.
##y_1 = y_2##
##\iff y_1 - y_2 = 0##
##\iff 4x - 6 - (\frac{1}{5}(x-1)^5)= 0##
There's no need to use derivatives! (In your notation, you have to find the points ##x## such that ##h(x) = 0##). Can you continue from here?
maybe i can conclude about the max solutions that is possible. if only at two points h'(x) = 0 , then intuitively i can see why there can't be more than 3 solutions. can't see how to proof it though.Ray Vickson said:What does this have to do with the original question? Finding the stationary points of h(x) is not the same thing as finding the zeros of h(x).
Dank2 said:cant get clean solutions
Dank2 said:maybe i can conclude about the max solutions that is possible. if only at two points h'(x) = 0 , then intuitively i can see why there can't be more than 3 solutions. can't see how to proof it though.
yes how can i use it hereMath_QED said:Ah, now I see what you are doing. You should write this out explicitly in the first post. But, you are thinking in the right track then! Do you know about Rolle's theorem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolle's_theorem
Dank2 said:yes how can i use it here
thanksMath_QED said:Suppose there are more than 3 zeros and use the fact that there are only 2 zeros for the derivative to derive a contradiction with Rolle's theorem.
EDIT: I have to add that, with this approach, you only proved that it has a maximum of 3 zeros. You also need to prove that it has exactly 3 zeros.
Dank2 said:yes how can i use it here