Quadratic with variable buried in sqrt?

  • Thread starter Thread starter irishetalon00
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quadratic Variable
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving the equation 0 = -250*(sqrt(x^2+1)-0.8)^2 + 98.1*x + 59.05, which leads to a quartic equation after manipulation. Participants clarify that while the equation may appear to reduce to a quadratic, it does not, and it ultimately has two real and two complex roots. The consensus is that numerical methods are preferred for solving quartic equations due to the complexity of closed-form solutions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quartic equations and their properties
  • Familiarity with numerical methods for root-finding
  • Knowledge of algebraic manipulation involving square roots
  • Experience with polynomial equations and their solutions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research numerical methods for solving quartic equations, such as the Newton-Raphson method
  • Study the closed-form solutions for quartic equations and their practical applications
  • Learn about polynomial long division and synthetic division techniques
  • Explore the implications of complex roots in polynomial equations
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those dealing with algebra and polynomial equations, as well as anyone interested in numerical analysis and root-finding algorithms.

irishetalon00
Messages
20
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


0 = -250*(sqrt(x^2+1)-0.8)^2 + 98.1*x + 59.05

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I can't figure out how to solve this equation! After expanding the squared term, I still end up with a sqrt(x^2+1) and I can't figure out how to perform a substitution or something to make it a nice clean quadratic.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Get the sqrt term alone on one side of the equation and then square both sides to get rid of the sqrt. You'll then have a quartic but if you simplify it as much as possible, a way to solve it may become apparent.
 
Ok I liked that suggestion. Now I'm here:
0 = -149809 + x(-19806.4) + x^2(-99901.4) + x^3(49050) + x^4(62500)
so now I have a quartic equation. Not sure how to proceed.
I mean it should reduce to a quadratic somehow, right?
 
It won't necessarily reduce to a quadratic. Sometimes one can solve a quartic by writing it as a quadratic in ##y\equiv x^2##, but this doesn't immediately appear to be one of those.

Are you required to solve it analytically? If not, the easiest thing is to solve it numerically by a root-seeking algorithm.
The coefficients don't look nice and neat like those of something that one would be given to solve analytically.
 
irishetalon00 said:
Ok I liked that suggestion. Now I'm here:
0 = -149809 + x(-19806.4) + x^2(-99901.4) + x^3(49050) + x^4(62500)
so now I have a quartic equation. Not sure how to proceed.
I mean it should reduce to a quadratic somehow, right?

No, not right. A quartic is a separate type of equation from a quadratic. Yours has two real and two complex roots. The two real roots are also the two real roots of your original equation, before you did any squaring.

Even though there are closed-form formulas for the solution of quartic equations, these formulas are rarely used in practice; numerical methods are much more frequently used.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K