Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26

Math Help - Discriminant of Roots - Stucked @ part ii after completing part i

  1. #1
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755

    Discriminant of Roots - Stucked @ part ii after completing part i

    I don't know how to do the part ii.

    The equation of a curve is y = 4x^2 - 2kx + k

    i) Find the range of values of k if the curve does not meet the x-axis.

    ii) Show that the line y = x + 1 intersects the curve for all real values of k.

    Solution
    i) Since curve does not meet x-axis, b^2-4ac < 0

     -2k^2-4(4)(k) < 0

    <br />
 -4k^2-16k < 0

     k(-4k-16) < 0

    <br />
k < 0 or -4k < 16<br />
 k < -4

    Range of Values of k is k < -4

    ii) Stucked!
    Last edited by CaptainBlack; December 31st 2009 at 12:21 AM. Reason: sort out LaTeX
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    From
    toronto
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Punch View Post
    I don't know how to do the part ii.

    The equation of a curve is y = 4x^2 - 2kx + k

    i) Find the range of values of k if the curve does not meet the x-axis.

    ii) Show that the line y = x + 1 intersects the curve for all real values of k.

    Solution
    i) Since curve does not meet x-axis, b^2-4ac < 0
     <b>-2k^2-4(4)(k) < 0</b> <br /> <b> -4k^2-16k < 0</b><br /> <b> k(-4k-16) < 0</b><br /> <b>k < 0 or -4k < 16</b><br /> <b> k < -4</b><br /> <b>Range of Values of k is k < -4</b>

    ii) Stucked!
    Suppose the curve and the line do intersect at some point, that means there x and y coordinates at that point are the same, hence we may substitute y=x+1 to the quadratic:
    x+1=4x^2-2kx+k, rearranging gives:
    4x^2-(2k+1)x+(k-1)=0, now consider the discriminant of this quadratic:
    delta=(2k+1)^2-16(k-1)
    delta=4((k-3/2)^2-7/4)
    implies that when k=3/2, delta<0, hence contradicts our assumption.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Super Member Bacterius's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Wellington
    Posts
    927
    Hello sym0110,
    for delta, you can use the \Delta command : \Delta


    For the second question, you must show that for any k, the equation x + 1 = 4x^2 - 2kx + k has at least one real solution in x. Check the discriminant of this quadratic equation to see if it can actually have real solutions (negative discriminant means no real solution). Can you follow up ?

    Take your quadratic equation : 4x^2 - 2kx + k - x - 1 = 0.

    This can be factorized as : 4x^2 - (2k + 1)x + (k - 1) = 0.

    Take the discriminant : \Delta = b^2 - 4ac = (2k + 1)^2 - 4 \times 4 \times (k - 1).

    We then have : \Delta = (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1).

    We want to prove that \Delta > 0, so (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1) > 0.

    That is : (2k)^2 + 4k + 1^2 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Simplify further : 4k^2 + 4k + 1 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Keep going : 4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    Is this correct ? Let us check the discriminant of this new quadratic :

    \Delta ' = 12^2 - 4 \times 4 \times 17 = 144 - 272 = -128 \ (< 0).

    If the discriminant is negative, it means the equation has no real roots and thus all values are greater than zero (this is because the a value of the quadratic equation is positive. If it was negative, then all values would be less than zero. Graph some equations to see what I mean). Thus we have proved that :

    4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    And therefore we have proved that for any real k, the line intersects the curve (finish the conclusion properly).
    Last edited by Bacterius; December 31st 2009 at 12:44 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacterius View Post
    Hello sym0110,
    for delta, you can use the \Delta command : \Delta


    For the second question, you must show that for any k, the equation x + 1 = 4x^2 - 2kx + k has at least one real solution in x. Check the discriminant of this quadratic equation to see if it can actually have real solutions (negative discriminant means no real solution). Can you follow up ?

    Take your quadratic equation : 4x^2 - 2kx + k - x - 1 = 0.

    This can be factorized as : 4x^2 - (2k + 1)x + (k - 1) = 0.

    Take the discriminant : \Delta = b^2 - 4ac = (2k + 1)^2 - 4 \times 4 \times (k - 1).

    We then have : \Delta = (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1).

    We want to prove that \Delta > 0, so (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1) > 0.

    That is : (2k)^2 + 4k + 1^2 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Simplify further : 4k^2 + 4k + 1 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Keep going : 4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    Is this correct ? Let us check the discriminant of this new quadratic :

    \Delta ' = 12^2 - 4 \times 4 \times 17 = 144 - 272 = -128 \ (< 0).

    If the discriminant is negative, it means the equation has no real roots and thus all values are greater than zero (this is because the a value of the quadratic equation is positive. If it was negative, then all values would be less than zero. Graph some equations to see what I mean). Thus we have proved that :

    4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    And therefore we have proved that for any real k, the line intersects the curve (finish the conclusion properly).
    Sorry but probably I suck at maths, I have highlighted the few points which I do not understand in red.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755
    I do not understand why we have to prove b^2-4ac>0.
    And what the checking of discriminant is all about, neither do I know where <br />
\Delta ' = 12^2 - 4 \times 4 \times 17 = 144 - 272 = -128 \ (< 0)<br />
came from.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Super Member Bacterius's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Wellington
    Posts
    927
    Then you should read this prior to messing with quadratic equations :

    Quadratic equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacterius View Post
    Then you should read this prior to messing with quadratic equations :

    Quadratic equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Okay, firstly, the part of bring x+1 into the equation was understandable because they have to meet, thus we have to equate them.

    However, does x+1=0 means thats it has real roots? I just don't get this part... sorry.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Newbie
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    4
    @Integral
    When k=3 the line also intersects the curve, the proof is down there.



    @Punch the first part you didnt understand:
    We want to prove that , so .
    This determinant came from the first equation assuming its intersections to the line y=x+1. You need to prove the determinant is bigger than 0 for you dont get a sqrt of negative number, what makes impossible the equation in reals and also impossible the intersection, since that is what we want to proof.

    Keep going :

    Is this correct ? Let us check the discriminant of this new quadratic :

    .
    The development of our determinant gave another quadratic function and we need to prove now that this function return ONLY positive values. That is, it must be above the x-axis. What quadratics have only positives results? Those with a>0 and roots with complex roots, that is, determinant of the equation must be <0.
    This is what Bacterius showed. The equation has only positive values.
    I attached the graph of 4kČ-12k+17, and there you can see it returns only positive values.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Discriminant of Roots - Stucked @ part ii after completing part i-intesection.bmp   Discriminant of Roots - Stucked @ part ii after completing part i-4x2-12x-17.bmp  
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    15,372
    Thanks
    1314
    Quote Originally Posted by Punch View Post
    I don't know how to do the part ii.

    The equation of a curve is y = 4x^2 - 2kx + k

    i) Find the range of values of k if the curve does not meet the x-axis.

    ii) Show that the line y = x + 1 intersects the curve for all real values of k.

    Solution
    i) Since curve does not meet x-axis, b^2-4ac < 0

     -2k^2-4(4)(k) < 0
    Your "b" is -2k so b^2= (-2k)^2= 4k^2 NOT " -2k^2".


    <br />
 -4k^2-16k < 0

     k(-4k-16) < 0

    <br />
k < 0 or -4k < 16<br />
 k < -4

    Range of Values of k is k < -4

    ii) Stucked!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacterius View Post
    Hello sym0110,
    for delta, you can use the \Delta command : \Delta


    For the second question, you must show that for any k, the equation x + 1 = 4x^2 - 2kx + k has at least one real solution in x. Check the discriminant of this quadratic equation to see if it can actually have real solutions (negative discriminant means no real solution). Can you follow up ?

    Take your quadratic equation : 4x^2 - 2kx + k - x - 1 = 0.

    This can be factorized as : 4x^2 - (2k + 1)x + (k - 1) = 0.

    Take the discriminant : \Delta = b^2 - 4ac = (2k + 1)^2 - 4 \times 4 \times (k - 1).

    We then have : \Delta = (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1).

    We want to prove that \Delta > 0, so (2k + 1)^2 - 16(k - 1) > 0.

    That is : (2k)^2 + 4k + 1^2 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Simplify further : 4k^2 + 4k + 1 - 16k + 16 > 0

    Keep going : 4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    Is this correct ? Let us check the discriminant of this new quadratic :

    \Delta ' = 12^2 - 4 \times 4 \times 17 = 144 - 272 = -128 \ (< 0).

    If the discriminant is negative, it means the equation has no real roots and thus all values are greater than zero (this is because the a value of the quadratic equation is positive. If it was negative, then all values would be less than zero. Graph some equations to see what I mean). Thus we have proved that :

    4k^2 - 12k + 17 > 0

    And therefore we have proved that for any real k, the line intersects the curve (finish the conclusion properly).
    Hi, is there a specific way in which i must express the equation as?
    Do i have to express it as ax^2-bx+c or ax^2+bx+c or is it fine for both?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  11. #11
    MHF Contributor
    Prove It's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    11,404
    Thanks
    1293
    Quote Originally Posted by Punch View Post
    Hi, is there a specific way in which i must express the equation as?
    Do i have to express it as ax^2-bx+c or ax^2+bx+c or is it fine for both?
    Express every Quadratic equation as ax^2 + bx + c.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  12. #12
    Flow Master
    mr fantastic's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    From
    Zeitgeist
    Posts
    16,948
    Thanks
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Prove It View Post
    Express every Quadratic equation as ax^2 + bx + c.
    Unfortunately, this advice needs to be taken with a grain of salt. However, I'm not going to open up the can of worms by saying that sometimes a factorised form or a turning point form might be more desirable than the standard form.

    @OP: You have said in a number of threads that you are bad at maths etc. That's no excuse for not investing the necessary time and effort so that you have a basic understanding of things like the discriminant and its relationship to the number of solutions of a quadratic equation etc. There comes a point when you must go back to your classnotes or textbook and review some of this material. Also, there are no simple recipes to problem solving ....
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  13. #13
    MHF Contributor
    Prove It's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    11,404
    Thanks
    1293
    Quote Originally Posted by mr fantastic View Post
    Unfortunately, this advice needs to be taken with a grain of salt. However, I'm not going to open up the can of worms by saying that sometimes a factorised form or a turning point form might be more desirable than the standard form.

    @OP: You have said in a number of threads that you are bad at maths etc. That's no excuse for not investing the necessary time and effort so that you have a basic understanding of things like the discriminant and its relationship to the number of solutions of a quadratic equation etc. There comes a point when you must go back to your classnotes or textbook and review some of this material. Also, there are no simple recipes to problem solving ....
    I only meant, write it as ax^2 + bx + c as opposed to ax^2 - bx + c.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  14. #14
    Super Member Bacterius's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Wellington
    Posts
    927
    Why would you want to write it as ax^2 - bx + c ? It would just be confusing, and since the discriminant heavily relies on the sign of \Delta, a little sign error could be fatal.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  15. #15
    Super Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    755
    Indeed, I have made quite a number of mistakes because of the + and - signs and they gave me answers that were world apart...

    So I was confused where I made the mistake and hence decided to confirm on whether to write it as ax^2 - bx + c or ax^2 + bx + c
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Triangle Elevation [Stucked @ Part D]
    Posted in the Geometry Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 13th 2010, 06:45 AM
  2. Matrix(Stucked at part iii)
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: January 16th 2010, 10:24 PM
  3. Stucked @ part ii after comleting part i
    Posted in the Geometry Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 31st 2009, 06:16 PM
  4. Sum of a part arithmatic and part geometric sequence
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 25th 2009, 10:53 PM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: February 13th 2009, 04:27 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum