Quadratic equations and inequalities

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the inequality |x-1|-|x|+|2x+3| > 2x+4 using the method of intervals. Key points include identifying critical points at x = -3/2, x = 0, and x = 1, which segment the number line into intervals. The analysis reveals that the inequality holds true for the interval [0, 1) and is not satisfied for any other values of x. The method emphasizes the importance of understanding absolute value definitions and their implications on sign changes within specified intervals.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of absolute value functions
  • Familiarity with inequalities and their properties
  • Knowledge of interval notation
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the method of intervals in greater depth
  • Learn about solving absolute value inequalities
  • Explore graphical methods for visualizing inequalities
  • Investigate advanced topics in algebra, such as polynomial inequalities
USEFUL FOR

Students, educators, and anyone interested in mastering algebraic inequalities, particularly those involving absolute values and interval analysis.

Kartik.
Messages
55
Reaction score
1
Well suppose for an example of an inequality,
|x-1|-|x|+|2x+3| > 2x+4

Well in one of its solutions we were told to apply the method of intervals, rather than taking say what; like 8 combination of signs.

For everyone of its intervals(say -3/2 [itex]\leq[/itex]x <0) we are said that 2x+3 [itex]\geq[/itex] 0, x<0 and x-1<0.

Is it just an intuitive outcome(guessing by the extremities of the limits) or did we do something to predict what the signs of the expressions will be?(as i was wondering if any such intervals, which violated an intuitive outcome ?)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what you mean by "intuitive" but the method of "predicting" the sign is to use the definition of "absolute value": |x|= x if [itex]x\ge 0[/itex], -x if x< 0.

Of course that says that the "change" comes when the argument of the absolute value function is 0. In order to deal with |x-1|-|x|+|2x+3| > 2x+4, I would note that x-1= 0 when x=1, x= 0 when x= 0, of course, and 2x+3= 0 when x= -3/2. Now put those in order: -3/2< 0 < 1. So if x< -3/2, it is also less than 0 and 1 and all of x-1, x and 2x+3 are negative. For x< -3/2, the inequality becomes -(x- 1)-(-x)+ (-(2x+3))> 2x+ 4. That is the same as -x+ 1+ x- 2x- 3= -2x- 2> 2x+ 4 which is, in turn, equivalent to -6> 4x or -3/2< x. Of course, if x< -3/2, "-3/2< x" can't be true so there is NO value of x, less than -3/2, satisfying that inequality.

If [itex]-3/2\le x< 0[/itex], x and x- 1 are still negative but 2x+3 is now non-negative and so the inequality is -(x-1)-(-x)+ (2x+3)> 2x+ 4. That is the same as -x+ 1+ x+ 2x+ 3= 2x+ 4> 2x+4 which is, again, never true (they equal not "larger than"). There is no x between -3/2 and 0 satifying this inequality.

If [itex]0\le x< 1[/itex] both 2x+3 and x are positive but x- 1 is still negative. Now the unquality is -(x-1)- x+ (2x+3)> 2x+ 3. That is the same as -x+ 1+ x+ 2x+ 3= 2x+ 4> 2x+ 3 which is always true. Every value of x, [itex]0\le x< 1[/itex] satisfies this inequality.

Finally, if [itex]x\ge 1[/itex] all three of x-1, x, and 2x+3 are positive. Now the inequality is (x- 1)- x+ (2x+ 3)= 2x+ 2> 2x+ 3. That is never true.

Putting all of those together, the original inequality is satified for all x, [itex]0\le x< 1[/itex] and no other x. The solution set is the interval [0, 1).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K