B Solving equations but getting an identity - what mistakes were made?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter farfromdaijoubu
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
When solving algebraic equations, ending up with an identity like 0=0 indicates that the equations are either dependent or redundant, meaning they do not provide unique solutions for the variable. This can occur when the variables cancel out, suggesting that the original equation may have been an identity to begin with. Mistakes leading to this outcome can include misapplying operations or using incorrect assumptions. In some cases, it reflects that the variable is a degree of freedom, allowing for multiple valid solutions. Understanding the distinction between conditional equations, identities, and contradictions is crucial for accurate problem-solving in algebra.
farfromdaijoubu
Messages
8
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
What are the mistakes made when you try to solve equations for some variable/s but end up with an identity?
This might be a bit vague but when solving algebra equations, what does it 'mean', or what mistakes does it imply if you end up with both sides of the equation being the same thing and getting nowhere? For example, you want to solve a system for x, but the x's end up cancelling and you get 0=0.

For context I was just doing some basic projectile motion stuff - wanted to find minimum speed at which a ball thrown at a given angle would always collide with another dropped at the same instant but ended up constant = constant.

But I've run into the same issue many times before and never properly learnt what I was doing wrong whenever it happened.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It usually means that your variable is actually a degree of freedom and can be set to anything. However, it could also mean that you made a mistake, like using the statement that you want to show, or simply typos. It depends on the case.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Likes Gavran, FactChecker and Bystander
farfromdaijoubu said:
TL;DR Summary: What are the mistakes made when you try to solve equations for some variable/s but end up with an identity?

This might be a bit vague but when solving algebra equations, what does it 'mean', or what mistakes does it imply if you end up with both sides of the equation being the same thing and getting nowhere? For example, you want to solve a system for x, but the x's end up cancelling and you get 0=0.

For context I was just doing some basic projectile motion stuff - wanted to find minimum speed at which a ball thrown at a given angle would always collide with another dropped at the same instant but ended up constant = constant.

But I've run into the same issue many times before and never properly learnt what I was doing wrong whenever it happened.
You don't need to do anything wrong to get an identity. An identity is a true statement. It just means that you didn't end up where you wanted to.

For example, if you use integration by parts twice, changing the roles of the functions, you tend to end up with an identity.
 
farfromdaijoubu said:
What are the mistakes made when you try to solve equations for some variable/s but end up with an identity?
There are three kinds of equations: conditional equations, identities, and contradictions.
A conditional equation is one in which the variable can take on only a limited number of values for the equation to be a true statement. For example, ##x^2 - 3x + 2 = 0##. This equation is a true statement only for x = 1 or x = 2.

An identity is an equation that is a true statement for all values of the variable. For example, ##x^2 - 3x + 2 = (x -1)(x - 2)##. Any real value (or even a complex value) can be substituted for x here and the resulting equation will be a true statement.

A contradiction is an equation that can never be true, no matter which value the variable takes on. For example, ##x = x + 1## is never true for any value.

farfromdaijoubu said:
This might be a bit vague but when solving algebra equations, what does it 'mean', or what mistakes does it imply if you end up with both sides of the equation being the same thing and getting nowhere? For example, you want to solve a system for x, but the x's end up cancelling and you get 0=0.
It seems to me that you are starting from an equation that is an identity and applying operations to both sides to eventually get to 0 = 0. Can you give me a specific example of an equation that you're talking about?
 
farfromdaijoubu said:
For context I was just doing some basic projectile motion stuff - wanted to find minimum speed at which a ball thrown at a given angle would always collide with another dropped at the same instant but ended up constant = constant.
For a system of equations this usually means that the equations are not independent of each other (redundant).
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...
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