Is it ever correct (true at least once) to make the following statement about quadratic equations?
There is at least one equation of the form x 2 + a x + b = c (where a , b , c ∈ R ) with roots r 1 , r 2 ∈ R , such that ∣ r 1 ∣ > ∣ r 2 ∣ , b = c , and r 1 2 − r 2 2 = ∣ r 1 ∣ ⋅ ∣ r 1 − r 2 ∣ .
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
We proceed via proof by contradiction:
Assume on the contrary, that there is at least one equation x 2 + a x + b − c = 0 with roots r 1 , r 2 ∈ R , and that all other conditions of this problem are satisfied. Then there exists a pair of real numbers r 1 and r 2 such that ( x − r 1 ) ( x − r 2 ) = x 2 − ( r 1 + r 2 ) x + r 1 r 2 = x 2 + a x + b − c = 0 . By completing the square, we see that this implies that ( x + 2 a ) 2 + b − c − ( 2 a ) 2 = 0 ⟹ x = − 2 a ± ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c .
Without loss of generality, take r 1 = − 2 a − ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c and r 2 = − 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c . We see that r 1 2 − r 2 2 = [ − 2 a − ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ] 2 − [ − 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ] 2 = [ ( 2 a ) 2 + a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ] − [ ( 2 a ) 2 − a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ] ∴ r 1 2 − r 2 2 = 2 a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c . Now we check the value of ∣ r 1 ∣ ⋅ ∣ r 1 − r 2 ∣ :
∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ − 2 a − ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ⋅ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ( − 2 a − a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) − ( − 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ( − 2 a − ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) ( − 2 ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ( a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c + 2 [ ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ] ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ( 2 ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ . Taking r 1 2 − r 2 2 = ∣ r 1 ∣ ⋅ ∣ r 1 − r 2 ∣ leaves us with the following: 2 a ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c = ( 2 ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∴ a = 2 a + ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c ⟹ a = 2 ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c .
Of course, the equation a = 2 ( 2 a ) 2 − b + c can only make sense if b = c , which contradicts the assumption that b = c . Hence, the statement is always false.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
(r1)^2-(r2^2)=|r1||r1-r2| implies 2(r1)(r2)+(r2)^2=0 or r2=0 (since |r1|>|r2|) This implies a^2-4(b-c)=a^2 or b=c. But this leads to a contradiction, as it is told that b and c are distinct.