Reducing one algebraic fraction to another

  • Thread starter Thread starter brotherbobby
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Fraction
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around the algebraic reduction of fractions, specifically the problem of transforming a set of fractions into a simplified form using an auxiliary variable, denoted as ##k##. The user successfully demonstrates the reduction of three fractions: ##\frac{x}{l(mb+nc-la)}##, ##\frac{y}{m(nc+la-mb)}##, and ##\frac{z}{n(la+mb-nc)}##, ultimately showing that they can be expressed in a common format. The user also seeks alternative methods for direct reduction without using the auxiliary variable, highlighting the complexity of the problem as presented by the authors.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of algebraic fractions and simplification techniques
  • Familiarity with auxiliary variables in mathematical expressions
  • Knowledge of high school-level algebra concepts
  • Ability to manipulate and rearrange algebraic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research methods for direct reduction of algebraic fractions without auxiliary variables
  • Explore advanced algebraic techniques for simplifying complex expressions
  • Study the properties of rational functions and their transformations
  • Learn about the application of algebraic identities in fraction reduction
USEFUL FOR

Students, educators, and mathematics enthusiasts interested in algebraic manipulation, particularly those tackling high school-level algebra problems involving fractions and simplification techniques.

brotherbobby
Messages
755
Reaction score
170
Homework Statement
If $$\frac{x}{l(mb+nc-la)}= \frac{y}{m(nc+la-mb)}=\frac{z}{n(la+mb-nc)},$$
prove that $$\boxed{\frac{l}{x(by+cz-lz)}= \frac{m}{y(cz+ax-by)}=\frac{n}{z(ax+by-cz)}}$$
Relevant Equations
A theorem on algebraic fractions :
(1) If ##\frac{a}{b}= \frac{c}{d}\Rightarrow \frac{ax}{bx}=\frac{cy}{dy}##
(2) If ##\frac{a}{b}=\frac{c}{b}=\frac{e}{f}=\ldots##, each of the fractions is equal to ##\pmb{\left(\frac{pa^n+qc^n+re^n+\dots}{pb^n+qd^n+rf^n+\ldots}\right)^{\frac{1}{n}}}##, where variables ##p, q, r,\ldots, n\in \mathbb{R}##
Problem statement : Let me copy and paste the problem as it appears in the text :
1638702732501.png


Attempt : I am afraid this looks like a very difficult problem, despite being at the elementary level (high school). My glance through the text shows that the authors have gone about reducing the first set of fractions to the second directly, without making the (traditional) use of the auxilliary variable ##k## to which the whole of the first list is first equated to and then simplified. Let me go with this method.

Let the given list of fractions ##\frac{x}{l(mb+nc-la)}= \frac{y}{m(nc+la-mb)}=\frac{z}{n(la+mb-nc)}=\boldsymbol{k}\;\text{(say)}##.

This would yield ##x = kl(mb+nc-la),\, y = km(nc+la-mb)\,\text{and}\, z = kn(la+mb-nc)##.

Let me the take first term in what I have to prove (given above), viz. ##\frac{l}{x(by+cz-lz)}##.

Sunstituting for ##x, y, z## from above in terms of ##k, l, m, n, a, b, c##, we get :
$$\text{L.H.S (Term 1)} = \frac{l}{x(by+cz-lz)} = \frac{l}{\underbrace{kl(mb+nc-la)}_{x}\left[ b\underbrace{km(nc+la-mb)}_{y}+c\underbrace{kn(la+mb-nc)}_{z}-a\underbrace{kl(mb+nc-la)}_{x} \right]},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(mb+nc-la)\left[mnbc+\bcancel{lmab}-m^2b^2+\cancel{lnac}+mnbc-n^2c^2-\bcancel{lmab}-\cancel{lnac}+la^2 \right]},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(mb+nc-la)(2mnbc+l^2a^2-m^2b^2-n^2c^2)},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(\cancel{2m^2nb^2c}+l^2ma^2b-m^3b^3-\bcancel{mn^2bc^2}+\bcancel{2mn^2bc^2}+l^2na^2c-\cancel{m^2nb^2c}-n^3c^3-2lmnabc-l^3a^3+lm^2ab^2+ln^2ac^2)},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(m^2nb^2c+l^2ma^2b-m^3b^3+mn^2bc^2+l^2n^2c-n^3c^3-2lmnabc-l^3a^3+lm^2ab^2+ln^2ac^2)}$$
and, upon rearranging, the first rational term on the L.H.S. reduces to :
$$\small{\text{L.H.S (Term 1)} = \frac{l}{x(by+cz-lz)}=\frac{1}{k^2(l^2ma^2b+lm^2ab^2+l^2na^2c+ln^2ac^2+m^2nb^2c+mn^2bc^2-l^3a^3-m^3b^3-n^3c^3-2lmnabc)}}$$... (1)

Let me take the second term of what I have to prove (given above), viz. ##\frac{m}{y(cz+ax-by)}##, substitute for ##x,y,z## like before and see if the final expression matches the same final expression of that above.

$$\text{L.H.S (Term 2)}= \frac{m}{y(cz+ax-by)}=\frac{1}{k^2(nc+la-mb)\left[ cn(la+mb-nc)+al(mb+nc-la)-bm(nc+la-mb)\right]},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(nc+la-mb)(lnac+\cancel{mnbc}-n^2c^2+\bcancel{lmab}+lnac-l^2a^2-\cancel{mnbc}-\bcancel{lmab}+m^2b^2)},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(nc+la-mb)(2lnac-l^2a^2+m^2b^2-n^2c^2)},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(\cancel{2ln^2ac^2}-\bcancel{l^2na^2c}+m^2nb^2c-n^3c^3+\bcancel{2l^2na^2c}-l^3a^3+lm^2ab^2-\cancel{ln^2ac^2}-2lmnabc+l^2ma^2b-m^3b^3+mn^2bc^2)},$$
$$=\frac{1}{k^2(l^2ma^2b+lm^2ab^2+m^2nb^2c+mn^2bc^2+l^2na^2c+ln^2ac^2-l^3a^3-m^3b^3-n^3c^3-2lmnabc)},$$

which is the same found above (1) when the first term was reduced.

The third fraction, viz. ##\frac{n}{z(ax+by-cz)}## also reduces to the same expression as (1) above, as I have checked.

Doubt : So I did the problem. However, as you have noticed, I have made use of the auxilliary variable ##k## above, which I equated all the fractions to. Does anyone know a way by which the fractions given can be directly reduced to those required? (That is the method asked for by the authors before the problem).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have not solved it yet but observed that we get another by exchange of variables;
l and x, m and y, n and z in one. And so let
xa=X,yb=Y,zc=Z,la=L,mb=M,nc=N the problem is written as
If
\frac{X}{L(M+N-L)}=\frac{Y}{M(N+L-M)}=\frac{Z}{N(L+M-N)}=1
then prove
\frac{L}{X(Y+Z-X)}=\frac{M}{Y(Z+X-Y)}=\frac{N}{Z(X+Y-Z)}

We can make the first equation equals to 1 without losing generality. By expressing X,Y,Z by M,N,L using the first equation
X+Y-Z=(N+M-L)(N+L-M)
Y+Z-X=(L+N-M)(L+M-N)
Z+X-Y=(M+L-N)(M+N-L)
and
\frac{(Y+Z-X)X}{L}=(N+M-L)(N+L-M)(L+M-N)
\frac{(Z+X-Y)Y}{M}=(N+M-L)(N+L-M)(L+M-N)
\frac{(X+Y-Z)Z}{N}=(N+M-L)(N+L-M)(L+M-N)
We get the expected result.
 
Last edited:
Your response (@anuttarasammyak) is similar to what I did in post #1, except that I equated all the fractions given to an arbitrary ##k##.

I post the solution below as given by the authors. It is incredibly well done and, needless to say, very difficult. I struggled at several places to understand what the authors were doing, let alone try and do it myself !

1638882095682.png
 
It seems to say 1/2 = 2/4 = (1+2)/(2+4). Smart but I think it is mere a technique .
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K