When do you need to check your answers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rib5
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the need to verify answers in engineering problems, particularly when multiple solutions arise from mathematical equations. The original poster describes a scenario involving a component value calculation using a computer algebra system, which yielded two potential answers, prompting questions about the validity of these solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the conditions under which answers may be deemed invalid, particularly in the context of mathematical operations that can introduce extraneous solutions. Questions arise about recognizing when to check answers and the implications of certain mathematical manipulations.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing insights about the importance of checking answers, especially in engineering contexts. Some have provided guidance on recognizing operations that may lead to false solutions, while others emphasize the necessity of verifying results based on physical relevance.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that certain mathematical operations, such as squaring or using periodic functions, can lead to extraneous solutions, highlighting the need for careful consideration of assumptions in problem-solving. There is also mention of the real-world implications of errors in engineering work, which adds a layer of urgency to the discussion.

Rib5
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
I was working on an engineering problem where I had to find the value of a component. I used Maxima (a computer algebra system) to get my answer, except that I got two answers instead of one. Only one of the answers satisfied my initial conditions.

So my question is "when do you need to check your answers"? I seem to recall some stuff about symmetrical functions or always positive or something else. Can anyone help me out or point me to some reading?


If anyone wants to know the exact equations I was using, they are here.

L1*L2 - M^2
------------------- = Leq
L1+L2 - 2*M

where L1 = L2 = 0.2
and Leq = 0.14

---->Solve for M

The answer I got was M = 0.2 and M = 0.08

If you plug in M = 0.2 you get 0.

Can anyone explain where this false answer came from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rib5 said:
If you plug in M = 0.2 you get 0.

[tex]L_1+L_2-2M=0[/tex] so the whole thing is undefined, not 0.
 
Last edited:
qntty said:
$L_1+L_2-2M=0$ so the whole thing is undefined, not 0.


Ooops, that is true. But it still doesn't answer the main question. One of the answers is still invalid.
 
If the equation is to make any sense, we must assume that [tex]L_1+L_2\not=2M[/tex]
 
qntty said:
If the equation is to make any sense, we must assume that [tex]L_1+L_2\not=2M[/tex]

I know. That assumption is what made me know that one of the answers was bogus. But the question I am asking is how do you know when to expect bogus answers so you know to test them instead of just assuming they are correct?
 
If there are radicals involved in the equation to be solved, then there is always a chance that one of the answers doesn't work, and this must always be checked because it's hard to catch. When there are fractions, division by zero could occur, but you don't need to check it in most cases as long as you take not of the bogus values before you solve the problem. If you are about to divide by a variable which isn't necessarily zero, then a solution is often times lost. When you're working with functions and their inverses (such as trig functions), be aware of the domain and range of the function and check you're answer, unless the function is bijective.
 
qntty said:
If there are radicals involved in the equation to be solved, then there is always a chance that one of the answers doesn't work, and this must always be checked because it's hard to catch. When there are fractions, division by zero could occur, but you don't need to check it in most cases as long as you take not of the bogus values before you solve the problem. If you are about to divide by a variable which isn't necessarily zero, then a solution is often times lost. When you're working with functions and their inverses (such as trig functions), be aware of the domain and range of the function and check you're answer, unless the function is bijective.

Cool, thanks for your help!
 
Rib5 said:
So my question is "when do you need to check your answers"?
Nobody has answered this simple question yet. The answer is equally simple: Always.

Engineers and scientists working in the real world often make decisions that, if wrong, can cost their employers an immense amount of money. Graduates fresh out of college can cost their employer tens of thousands of dollars with a simple screwup. Nobody trusts freshouts, at least not initially. Once you have gained your employer's trust, your mistakes might cost them hundreds of thousands, then millions, and later on in your career, even more. Employers trust these people even less. Complex projects often have a special team, the verification and validation team, whose sole job is to detect mistakes. Extremely complex projects have yet another team, the independent verification and validation team, whose sole job is to detect mistakes that have slipped through all the checks and balances.

Just because multiple layers of people exist whose jobs are to detect errors made by the design and development teams does not give the designers and developers free reign to make mistakes. Those verification and validation jobs exist in small quantities because the original designers are expected to have done their due diligence in checking their own work. Sloppy work done by the design and development team inevitably leads to incomplete work done by the verification and validation teams and a garbage product going out the door.

Moral of the story: Get in the habit of always checking your work.
 
D H said:
Nobody has answered this simple question yet. The answer is equally simple: Always.

Engineers and scientists working in the real world often make decisions that, if wrong, can cost their employers an immense amount of money. Graduates fresh out of college can cost their employer tens of thousands of dollars with a simple screwup. Nobody trusts freshouts, at least not initially. Once you have gained your employer's trust, your mistakes might cost them hundreds of thousands, then millions, and later on in your career, even more. Employers trust these people even less. Complex projects often have a special team, the verification and validation team, whose sole job is to detect mistakes. Extremely complex projects have yet another team, the independent verification and validation team, whose sole job is to detect mistakes that have slipped through all the checks and balances.

Just because multiple layers of people exist whose jobs are to detect errors made by the design and development teams does not give the designers and developers free reign to make mistakes. Those verification and validation jobs exist in small quantities because the original designers are expected to have done their due diligence in checking their own work. Sloppy work done by the design and development team inevitably leads to incomplete work done by the verification and validation teams and a garbage product going out the door.

Moral of the story: Get in the habit of always checking your work.


Thanks for that real world info. I think I should have been more specific about my question though. I didn't mean checking work for errors in the solutions, but knowing when bogus answers are possible. I guess getting more than one answer usually means you should check to make sure they both work, especially when only one answer should physically make sense.

As far as checking for the correct answer, I think I am covered because I spend almost as much time checking my answers on my homework as actually solve them. I usually run a simulation in spice (electrical engineering simulation tool) to make sure it checks out.
 
  • #10
It's a matter of learning which mathematical operations can introduce extraneous solutions.

If the derivation involves:

  • squaring both sides of the equation (as is often done to eliminate radicals)
  • raising both sides of the equation to any even power
  • taking the sine, cosine, or any periodic function of the equation
  • employing any function whose inverse operation is not itself a function (such as squaring, sine, cosh, etc.)

... then you need to check for false answers.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Redbelly98 said:
It's a matter of learning which mathematical operations can introduce extraneous solutions.

If the derivation involves:

  • squaring both sides of the equation (as is often done to eliminate radicals)
  • raising both sides of the equation to any even power
  • taking the sine, cosine, or any periodic function of the equation
  • employing any function whose inverse operation is not itself a function (such as squaring, sine, cosh, etc.)

... then you need to check for false answers.

also, multiplying both sides of an equation by an expression containing a variable.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
37K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K