1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

B Verifying that all solutions to a system of eq. are found

  1. Aug 2, 2016 #1
    I am given the following problem: Find all ordered pairs (a, b) such that ##2a + b = 12## and ##ab = 3##. Given this system of equations, I simply use substitution, and then solve the quadratic ##2a^2 - 12a + 3 = 0##. Solving this, I obtain two ordered pairs: ##\displaystyle (\frac{6 + \sqrt{30}}{2},~6 - \sqrt{30})## and ##\displaystyle (\frac{6 - \sqrt{30}}{2},~6 + \sqrt{30})##. These are all of the ordered pairs that I found. The problem asks to find all of the ordered pairs that satisfy the system. How can I be absolutely sure (through some kind of informal logic) that only two such ordered pairs exist, and these two are those ordered pairs?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 2, 2016 #2

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

    You can rule out ##ab=0##, so you may substitute ##b=\frac{3}{a}## and multiply the equation by ##a## without changing the solutions.
    Now you see, that the equation is of order ##2##, i.e. there cannot be more than ##2## solutions.
    To verify that your solutions are valid, simply insert them into the original equations and see whether they satisfy them.

    You could also argue geometrically. A line (eq.1) intersects a hyperbola (eq.2) in at most ##2## points.
     
  4. Aug 2, 2016 #3
    Because you have deduced it. Assume ##(a,b)## is a par of real numbers satisfying your equations. this implies your quadratic equations. The quadratic equation only has two solutions. so the initial assumption implies ##a## is either of the two values you found. but as fresh pointed out, ##a## uniquely determines ##b##. So indeed there can only be two solutions.
     
  5. Aug 2, 2016 #4

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

    Ok, in this small example it might be correct, if the calculation steps are carefully described.
    It is not true in general, however. A deduction is ##x \in A ⇒ x \in B##. It does not guarantee ##x \in B ⇒ x \in A##.
    Therefore all deduction steps will have to be equivalence relations. Your wording "because you deduced it" often leads to errors.
    There is a fundamental difference between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition!
     
  6. Aug 2, 2016 #5
    Yes this is all true, that is why I put an explanation later, although maybe i didn't make myself clear that i was filling the steps. If you want a set theoretic proof, you can take ##A'## be the solutions of the quadratic equation and ##A## to be pairs of real numbers which solve the first equation. Then show ##\phi:A'\rightarrow A##, ##\phi(a)=(a,3/a)## is a set isomorphism. So ##A## and ##A'## must have the same number of elements, or cardinality if you like. Since we know ##A'## has two elements, so has ##A##.

    The details of the proof come in computing ##A'## and in showing that ##\phi## is a well defined function, and is both injective and surjective.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2016
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Verifying that all solutions to a system of eq. are found
Loading...