Where Did I Go Wrong in Solving the Inequality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RChristenk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    algebra-precalculus
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the inequality \( \frac{1}{x} < 4 \) and understanding the implications of the sign of \( x \). Participants are exploring the conditions under which the inequality holds true, particularly focusing on the cases where \( x \) is positive and negative.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of multiplying by a negative value and how it affects the direction of the inequality. There is confusion regarding the assumption that \( x < 0 \) and how it interacts with the derived conditions from the inequality.

Discussion Status

Several participants are questioning their assumptions and the logical flow of their reasoning. Some have offered insights into the importance of maintaining the assumption that \( x \) is negative while interpreting the results of their calculations. There is a recognition of the need to reconcile the derived conditions with the original assumptions.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the constraints of the problem, particularly the implications of assuming \( x < 0 \) while also deriving conditions that suggest \( x \) could be positive. This has led to discussions about the nature of inequalities and the reversibility of inferences drawn from them.

RChristenk
Messages
73
Reaction score
9
Homework Statement
Solve ##\dfrac{1}{x}<4##
Relevant Equations
Inequalities
##\dfrac{1}{x}<4##

For ##x>0##:

##1<4x \Rightarrow x>\dfrac{1}{4}##

For ##x<0##:

##1<4x \Rightarrow \dfrac{1}{4}<x \Rightarrow x<-\dfrac{1}{4}##

But the problem is ##x<0## works in the original expression instead of just ##x<-\dfrac{1}{4}##, so from calculations alone I missed ##[-\dfrac{1}{4}, 0)##. I feel conceptually I'm not understanding inequalities or my calculations are wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you multiply both sides by a negative valued x, the inequality flips direction.

##4x<1##.

You also didn't handle what comes after that very well in your attempt- if you did believe ##1/4<x## then there would be no solutions since x has to be negative. Think through carefully what the next step needs to be here.

Sometimes it helps to say if we're assuming x is negative, replace it with -y and assume y is positive.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: docnet
I'm getting confused from assuming ##x<0##, because doing the calculation results in ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##, which by itself means ##x## is positive in ##[0,\dfrac{1}{4})##. But I think I'm starting to understand I must keep in mind the starting assumption ##x## is negative, so ##x<0## is a fixed condition, despite the calculation ending up showing ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker
RChristenk said:
I'm getting confused from assuming ##x<0##, because doing the calculation results in ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##, which by itself means ##x## is positive in ##[0,\dfrac{1}{4})##. But I think I'm starting to understand I must keep in mind the starting assumption ##x## is negative, so ##x<0## is a fixed condition, despite the calculation ending up showing ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##.
If we choose any ##x## in ##(-\infty,0)##, it is true that ##x## is in ##(-\infty,1/4)##. The latter condition does not contradict the first condition. Does this help?
 
Last edited:
docnet said:
If we choose any ##x## in ##(-\infty,0)##, it is true that ##x## is in ##(\infty,1/4)##. The latter condition does not contradict the first condition. Does this help?
Yes I understand better now. Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: docnet
RChristenk said:
Yes I understand better now. Thank you.
The second interval should be ##(-\infty,1/4)##, not ##(\infty,1/4)##! Sorry about the typo, I'm very tired and it somehow got past me.
 
RChristenk said:
I'm getting confused from assuming ##x<0##, because doing the calculation results in ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##, which by itself means ##x## is positive in ##[0,\dfrac{1}{4})##. But I think I'm starting to understand I must keep in mind the starting assumption ##x## is negative, so ##x<0## is a fixed condition, despite the calculation ending up showing ##x<\dfrac{1}{4}##.
That's good. The equation tells you that AT LEAST ##x\lt \dfrac{1}{4}##. But that was with the additional assumption that ##x \lt 0##. So both must be true. So ##x \lt 0## for this case.
 
Another thing to be careful about with inequalities is reversibility of the inference.
Showing that ##1/x<4## and ##x<0## leads to ##x<1/4## does not of itself prove that ##x<0## and ##x<1/4## implies ##1/x<4##.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K