Solving Fraction Addition: Understanding Common Denominators

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holocene
  • Start date Start date
Holocene
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
Consider the addition of 2 fractions:

\displaystyle{\frac{7}{x - 3} + \frac{1}{3 - x}}

We know we must find a least common denominator in order to add the fractions, so let's consider them:

We have x - 3, and we also have 3 - x.

Suppose we rewrote the first denominator as -(3 - x). In other words: x - 3 = -(3 - x)

Our denominators would then be -(3 - x) & (3 - x). Note we haven't changed the value of the denominators, we have simply rewritten them.

The fraction problem would then become:

\displaystyle{\frac{7}{-(3 - x)} + \frac{1}{3 - x}}

Note that when a minus sign is placed in a fraction, it can be placed in either the numberator or the denominator, as it does not matter. So, we can have identical denominators for the purpose of addition by simply moving the minus sign to the numberator in the first fraction:

\displaystyle{\frac{-7}{3 - x} + \frac{1}{3 - x} = \frac{-6}{3 - x}}

My question is, why is this wrong?

The book instead rewrites the OTHER denominator, and the final problem looks like this:

\displaystyle{\frac{7}{x - 3} + \frac{1}{3 - x} = \frac{7}{x - 3} + \frac{1}{-(x - 3)} = \frac{7}{x - 3} + \frac{-1}{x - 3} = \frac{6}{x - 3}}

What am I doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You're answer is the same as the books, but you have written the minus sign on the top, and they have written it on the bottom.
 
DeadWolfe said:
You're answer is the same as the books, but you have written the minus sign on the top, and they have written it on the bottom.

Damn I just realized that...:shy:

Amazing how it helps to look at the whole thing on the screen like that.

Thanks!
 
Also, my answer had a negative term in the fraction, and theirs did not, so I guess theirs is more of the "correct" way, even if the values are in fact the same?
 
It's not "more correct" (not even really sure what that means!) but I personally find it more concise to write answers with the minimum number of symbols, including negative signs. Your answer is fine.
 
Holocene:

Let us prove that:
\frac{-a}{b}=\frac{a}{-b}=-\frac{a}{b}

First off:
\frac{a}{b}+\frac{-a}{b}=a*\frac{1}{b}+(-a)*\frac{1}{b}=(a+(-a))*\frac{1}{b}=0*\frac{1}{b}=0
Hence, we have: \frac{-a}{b}=-\frac{a}{b}, since by

1.definiton of -a/b, we have:
\frac{a}{b}+(-\frac{a}{b})=0
and
2. We may prove that additive inverses are unique.

Furthermore:
\frac{a}{-b}=\frac{1*a}{(-1)*b}=\frac{1}{(-1)}*\frac{a}{b}=(-1)*\frac{a}{b}=-\frac{a}{b}
by employing a few derivable results.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top