Question: Prove that has no real roots, if a and b are unequal.
what confuses me though is the way the question was stated.
according to what we actually proved, the question should have been "Prove that a and b are unequal if has no real roots."
Rather what we actually proved is its converse i think .... what do u suggest?
Hello Jhevon,
I'm a little confused ...
"a and b are unequal if ...=0 has no real roots" is the same as "if ...=0 has no real roots, (then) a and b are unequal"
And this last sentence rather leads to , doesn't it ?
Actually, this implication is an equivalence, since the discriminant is ^^
the "if" was in front of the "a and b are unequal"
the way ibnashraf re-worded it, yes.And this last sentence rather leads to , doesn't it ?
yes, i realize that. but i am a good little boy and i prove what i am told to proveActually, this implication is an equivalence, since the discriminant is ^^