We all know how to solve the equation mx+n=0 (m,n are constants).The answer is of course −mn.
Then what if one day we forget about how to solve ax+b=0,but remember the quadratic formula for ax2+bx+c=0?x=2a−b±b2−4ac
I have 2 ways:
1.mx+n=0,x(mx+n)=0.Solve for mx2+nx+0=0,place a→m,b→n,c→0,we get x=2m−n±n2−4m×0=2m−n±∣n∣=2m−n±n=0 or −mn
That 0 is of course not a root.So the root is −mn
2.Solve for 0x2+mx+n=0,place a→0,b→m,c→n.
Wait,a can't be 0 ! Try using L'Hopital.
If m>0,then a→0lim2a−m−m2−4na doesn't exist.
a→0lim2a−m+m2−4na=a→0lim∂a∂(2a)∂a∂(−m+m2−4na)=a→0lim22m2−4na−4n=∣m∣−n=−mn
If m<0,then a→0lim2a−m+m2−4na doesn't exist.
a→0lim2a−m−m2−4na=a→0lim∂a∂(2a)∂a∂(−m−m2−4na)=a→0lim22m2−4na4n=∣m∣n=−mn
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
We could multiply both sides by mx−n. Then (mx+n)(mx−n)=0(mx−n) becomes m2x2−n2=0, and using the quadratic formula this solves to x=2m2−0±02−4m2(−n2) or x=±mn. Then checking for extraneous solutions, we would eliminate x=mn and keep x=−mn.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
An alternate spin on your approach would be to start with mx+n=0 and square both sides.
m2x2+2mnx+n2=0x=2m2−2mn±4m2n2−4m2n2=−mn
The advantage of this is that we don't have to artificially neglect any roots
Log in to reply
Good one!I haven't think of this
We could multiply both sides by mx−n. Then (mx+n)(mx−n)=0(mx−n) becomes m2x2−n2=0, and using the quadratic formula this solves to x=2m2−0±02−4m2(−n2) or x=±mn. Then checking for extraneous solutions, we would eliminate x=mn and keep x=−mn.
Log in to reply
Thank you.I haven't think of this one.
If we can remember how to graph, we could also just graph y = mx + n and find the x-intercept.
Log in to reply
Ha Ha,that's true!