MHB Why is 2x - 4 less than 1 in this inequality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Casio1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inequality
Casio1
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone

I have an inequality

2x - 4 < 1

I had to double check it to ensure I wrote it down correctly.

2x < 1 + 4

x < 2.5

2(2.5) - 4 < 1

1 < 1

Is this me or am I missing something?

2x - 4 < 1 reads to me as 2x - 4 should be less than < 1 and not equal to it?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In order to check it you should try numbers less than $5/2$, not equal to. Once you plugged it in the original equation it was good that it wasn't a solution, or else something would have went horribly wrong. Try $x=2$. (Nod)
 
Yes I see what you mean when putting 2 into the inequality, but I am making that figure up knowing it will be less than 1?

My misunderstanding seems to be that finding the value of 'x' in this example does not prove the inequality correct?

I must be missing something here as x = 2.5 but for some reason in this example 2x - 4 < 1 mathematically does not work?

2(2.5) - 4 < 1

Is it not a typo error?

should it not be;

2(2.5) - 4 < 1
 
The values of $x$ you have found are the ones less than two and half, not equal to. Why should it be $2x+4 \leq 1$? You don't need equality. Geometrically, you have the points belonging to the line $y=2x+4$ and below the line $y=1$, but you discount the intersection, which happens at the point $x= 5/2$.

Also, note that $5/2$ is not less than itself, thus it cannot be a solution! If it doesn't belong to the solution set, it cannot satisfy the given inequality. (Nod)
 
You have found that x must be less than 2.5, so as stated above, if you let x = 2.5, then your inequality will not be true.

Let x = 2.5 - y where y may be as small or large as we desire, as long as 0 < y.

Now, substituting this into the original inequality, we find:

2(2.5 - y) - 4 < 1

5 - 2y - 4 < 1

1 - 2y < 1

0 < 2y

0 < y
 
OK I think I have got it now. I find a value for 'x' which I did at 5/2, which is in decimal form 2.5.

This value is definitely in the inequality, so is a strick value. The misunderstanding I think I had was in understanding that ALL values up to 2.5 can be considered, so if I said;

x = - 2, which is < 2.5, I could write;2(- 2) - 4 < 1- 4 - 4 < 1I understand it know, thanks everyone. :cool:
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top