Solving 0x^2 + ax + b = 0: Why Different Results?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JusApee
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation 0x² + ax + b = 0 and the implications of treating it as a second-degree polynomial versus a linear function. Participants explore the reasoning behind different results obtained when solving the equation and question the validity of applying the quadratic formula when a = 0.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the treatment of the equation f(x) = 0x² + ax + b as a second-degree function, noting that it simplifies to a linear function when 0x² is removed.
  • Another participant points out that the quadratic formula is not valid when a = 0 due to division by zero, suggesting an alternative method of "completing the square" for deriving solutions.
  • A later reply emphasizes that as long as a is not exactly zero, the quadratic formula can be used, and discusses the behavior of solutions as a approaches zero using Taylor approximation.
  • One participant clarifies that the polynomial's degree is determined by the highest power with a nonzero coefficient, asserting that 0x² + ax + b is a first-degree polynomial, not second-degree.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of the equation as a second-degree polynomial and the validity of using the quadratic formula when a = 0. There is no consensus on the implications of these points.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the limitations of applying the quadratic formula in cases where a = 0 and the definitions surrounding polynomial degrees, but do not resolve these issues.

JusApee
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, PF! I'm here with a question. It may be stupid and I may be wrong (I'm surely wrong somewhere in here)...

Okay, so we have:
[itex]f(x) = 0x^2+ax+b = ax+b[/itex]
You agree with me, right? But what if I won't remove [itex]0x^2[/itex] from my equation? That would leave it like [itex]f(x) = 0x^2 + ax + b[/itex] which is still the same thing but it is a 2nd degree function.

So if I try to solve [itex]f(x) = 0[/itex] and treat it like a 2nd degree function, it would look like this:

[itex]0x^2 + ax + b = 0;[/itex]

[itex]Δ = a^2 - 4*0*b = a^2 ≥ 0[/itex]

So.. [itex]∃ x_1 , x_2 , \in\mathbb R[/itex]

[itex]x_1,_2 = \frac{-a\ \ \pm\ \ a}{0}[/itex]

And that leaves us with the solutions:

[itex]x_1 = \frac{-2a}{0} \not\in\mathbb R[/itex]
and
[itex]x_2 = \frac{0}{0} \not\in\mathbb R[/itex]

However, we all know that a linear function:
[itex]g(x) = ax+b[/itex] has the solution: [itex]x = \frac{-b}{a}[/itex]

So why do I get such different results if I treat the same function differently? I mean, did I think something wrong in my reasoning? It's not part of my homework or anything, it just came to me while reading a topic here and I had to write it down to see what would happen... So it got my attention. Something must be wrong here, but teoretically [itex]f(x) = g(x)[/itex] ... So I got curious about it.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The derivation of the quadratic equation solution formula is not valid if ##a=0## (division by zero), so you can't use ##x=\frac{-b\pm \sqrt{b^2 -4ac}}{2a}##. Do you know how to derive the formula by "completing the square"?
 
hilbert2 said:
The derivation of the quadratic equation solution formula is not valid if ##a=0## (division by zero), so you can't use ##x=\frac{-b\pm \sqrt{b^2 -4ac}}{2a}##. Do you know how to derive the formula by "completing the square"?

Hmm... Looks like I forgot that detail. It actually makes much more sense now.
Now that I think better, the teacher said this back when I studied this.
[itex]ax^2 + bx + c = 0 , \ \ a \not = 0[/itex]

I don't know what do you mean by deriving the formula by "completing the square". Yes, I know how to derive the functions, I learned this year. I don't know what "completing the square" means. I may have learned it, but I may not know the english name.
 
No matter how close [itex]a[/itex] is to zero, as long as it is not precisely zero, the solution formula to the quadratic equation can be used. This means that it makes sense to examine what happens to the zeros in the limit [itex]a\to 0[/itex]. The important tool to this is the Taylor approximation

[tex] \sqrt{1 + \delta} = 1 + \frac{1}{2}\delta + O(\delta^2)[/tex]

which holds at the limit [itex]\delta\to 0[/itex]. The solutions to

[tex] ax^2 + bx + c = 0[/tex]

can be written as

[tex] x = \frac{-b \pm |b|\sqrt{1 - \frac{4ac}{b^2}}}{2a}[/tex]

and now the quantitity [itex]-\frac{4ac}{b^2}[/itex] takes the role of [itex]\delta[/itex]. In the limit [itex]a\to 0[/itex] the zeros can be approximated with formula

[tex] x = \frac{-b \pm |b|\big(1 - \frac{2ac}{b^2} + O(a^2)\big)}{2a}[/tex]

If one studies the cases [itex]b>0[/itex] and [itex]b<0[/itex] separately, one finds that eventually the zeros can be simplified to the following forms:

[tex] x = -\frac{c}{b} + O(a)\quad\textrm{or}\quad x = -\frac{b}{a} + \frac{c}{b} + O(a)[/tex]

Thus we see that one of the zeros approaches the number [itex]-\frac{c}{b}[/itex], which is the solution to

[tex] bx + c = 0[/tex]

while the other zero diverges to [itex]\pm\infty[/itex].
 
JusApee said:
Hello, PF! I'm here with a question. It may be stupid and I may be wrong (I'm surely wrong somewhere in here)...

Okay, so we have:
[itex]f(x) = 0x^2+ax+b = ax+b[/itex]
You agree with me, right? But what if I won't remove [itex]0x^2[/itex] from my equation? That would leave it like [itex]f(x) = 0x^2 + ax + b[/itex] which is still the same thing but it is a 2nd degree function.
No, the degree of a (nonzero) polynomial is by definition the highest power which occurs with a nonzero coefficient. So ##0x^2 + ax + b## has degree 1, not 2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K