MHB Finding the roots of quadratic equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding the roots of the quadratic equation (2m + 1)x^2 - 4mx = 1 - 3m, specifically seeking methods that do not involve the discriminant. One suggested approach is to complete the square, leading to the condition that the right-hand side must equal zero for equal roots. Another method involves comparing coefficients, where the relationships between the roots and coefficients yield equations that can be solved for m and subsequently for x. Participants confirm that their reasoning aligns, clarifying the distinction between the variables x and r in the context of the equations. The conversation emphasizes alternative techniques for solving quadratic equations without relying on the discriminant.
paulmdrdo1
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
can you show me a way of solving this problem without considering the discriminant.

Find the roots of equation subject to the given condition.

$(2m + 1)x^2-4mx = 1-3m$ has equal roots.

I solved it using discriminant but I want to know other way of solving it. Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
paulmdrdo said:
can you show me a way of solving this problem without considering the discriminant.

Find the roots of equation subject to the given condition.

$(2m + 1)x^2-4mx = 1-3m$ has equal roots.

I solved it using discriminant but I want to know other way of solving it. Thanks!

you can complete the square and make the constant part as zero

first multiply by (2m + 1) to avoid redical

$((2m + 1)x)^2-2(2m)((2m+1)x) = (1-3m)(2m+1)$

add 4m^2 on both sides to complete square
$((2m + 1)x)^2-2(2m)((2m+1)x) + (2m)^2 = (1-3m)(2m+1)+ 4m^2$

or $((2m+1)x- 2m)^2 = (1-3m)(2m+1)+ 4m^2$

for the roots to be equal RHS has to be zero

now you should be above to proceed
 
Another way to do this is by "comparing coefficients".

If:

$x^2 - \dfrac{4m}{2m+1}x + \dfrac{3m - 1}{2m+1} = 0 = (x-r)^2 = x^2 - 2rx + r^2$

we get two equations:

$2r = \dfrac{4m}{2m+1}$

$r^2 = \dfrac{3m - 1}{2m + 1}$.

Thus:

$r^2 = \left(\dfrac{2m}{2m+1}\right)^2 = \dfrac{3m-1}{2m+1}$.

This allows you to solve for $m$, and thus solve for $x = r$.
 
where did you get this?

$(x-r)^2 = x^2 - 2rx + r^2$

I thought something similar to this by letting r to be the roots of my equation.

since $S = \frac{-b}{a}=r+r$

I get $\frac{-b}{a}=2r$

and $P=\frac{c}{a}=r\times r$

I get $ \frac{c}{a}=r^2$

now I will have the same equation as you do

$2r=\frac{4m}{2m+1}$

and

$r^2=\frac{3m-1}{2m+1}$

Am I thinking it the same way that you did?

the r here is the value that I will plug in place of x in my equation.

but from this $(x-r)^2 = x^2 - 2rx + r^2$ It seems x and r are different?

why is that? thanks!
 
Last edited:
In THIS equation:

$(x-r)^2 = x^2 - 2rx + r^2$

$r$ and $x$ ARE different.

But in THIS equation:

$(x - r)^2 = 0$

we must have $x - r = 0$ (0 is the square root of 0), and thus $x = r$.

And yes, you were thinking correctly, good job!
 
Oh yes that's helpful. :) thanks!
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top