Roots & Product of ax^2 + bx + c = 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter rhule009
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Product Roots
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the sum of the roots and the product of the roots of the quadratic equation ax^2 + bx + c = 0 are -b/a and c/a, respectively. Participants emphasize that knowledge of the quadratic formula is unnecessary for this proof. Instead, they suggest using the factorization of the equation, expressing it as a(x - u)(x - v), where u and v are the roots. By multiplying the factors and comparing coefficients, one can derive the required relationships for the roots. This method provides a straightforward approach to understanding the properties of quadratic equations.
rhule009
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Prove that the sum of the roots and product of the roots of the equation
ax^2 + bx + c = 0 are
-b/a and c/a respectively
thank you
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Do you know what the quadratic formula is?
 
You don't need that. You dont' need to know what the roots are at all. You can let them be r and s, and just use standard results such as if r is a root of f(x), then f(x) = (x-r)g(x) for some g(x). I.e. just factorize the equation.
 
If u and v are roots of that equation then
ax^2+ bx+ c= a(x- u)(x- v)[/itex]<br /> Multiply the right side and compare corresponding coefficients.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top