Why Is Understanding Partial Fraction Decomposition Important?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the importance of understanding partial fraction decomposition in the context of rational functions. Participants explore different methods for decomposing rational functions and express a desire for deeper comprehension beyond memorization of techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their confusion regarding the decomposition of rational functions, specifically contrasting two different forms of decomposition for the function (x^2 + 3x + 2)/(x(x^2 + 1)).
  • Another participant outlines a method for finding coefficients in partial fraction decomposition, providing a step-by-step approach to derive equations for A and B from the function (x + 4)/((x - 2)(x - 3)).
  • A third participant shares a resource (a PDF) that purportedly clarifies the proof of these decompositions, suggesting that the proof will demonstrate the correctness of the coefficients derived.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and approaches to partial fraction decomposition, indicating that there is no consensus on a single method or understanding of the topic. Some participants are focused on specific techniques while others seek a broader conceptual understanding.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that the discussion may be limited by the participants' varying familiarity with algebraic techniques and the specific contexts in which these decompositions are applied. The mention of different strategies suggests that the effectiveness of methods may depend on the particular rational function being analyzed.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students learning about partial fraction decomposition, educators seeking to understand common student misconceptions, and anyone interested in the application of algebraic techniques in rational functions.

eric_999
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Alright, I am here again with another question...

When I have a rational function, let's say (x+4)/(x-2)(x-3) I rewrite it like A/(x-2) + B(x-3) and then solve it for A & B. But when we have for e.g (x^2 + 3x + 2)/(x(x^2 +1 )) the book tells me to rewrite it like:
A/x + (Bx + C)/(x^2 + 1), and then solve for A & B. I understand that the term x^2 +1 cannot be further decomposed (at least not if we only consider real numbers). However feel I don't get everything.

For example if I instead try to rewrite it on the form A/x + B/(x^2 + 1), so A(x^2 + 1) + Bx = x^2 +3x + 2, so A = 1, B = 3, and A = 2, which is of course impossible. On the other hand I can see that the other form described above (which the book tells me to use) works fine.

The problem is that with different rational functions I might be able to try different strategies and just see which one works out, but I feel i don't understand it the way I want to. In the book they simply say "the rational function P(x)/Q(x) can be expressed as a sum of partial fractions like this: ... but we don't explain it further because this is not a course in algebra" I feel I need to really understand, not just memorize the techniques!

Thanks for help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are, in fact, a number of ways of finding the coefficients for the fractions. If you have
\frac{x+ 4}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}= \frac{A}{x- 2}+ \frac{B}{x- 3}

1. Do the addition on the right: multiply both numerator and denominator of the first fraction by x- 3 and the numerator and denominator of the second fraction by x- 2:
\frac{x+ 4}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}= \frac{A(x- 3)}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}+ \frac{B(x- 2)}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}
= \frac{Ax- 3A+ Bx- 2B}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}= \frac{(A+ B)x- (3A- 2B)}{(x- 2)(x- 3)}
so we must have A+ B= 1 and -3A- 2B= 4.

2. Multiply both sides by (x- 3)(x- 2):
x+ 4= A(x- 3)+ B(x- 2)= (A+ B)x- (3A+ 2B)
so that we have the same two equations.

3. After getting
x+ 4= A(x- 3)+ B(x- 2)
choose any two values you like for x to get two linear equations for A and B.

4. In particular, choosing x= 2 and x= 3 gives very simple, separated, equations: 6= -A and 7= B.
 
Here is a pdf that makes it nice and clear.

The proof of these decompositions is not going to be too interesting, it'll just show that in each case, for the right coefficients, the simplest form of the numerator is the one given by the theorem.
 
Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K