Quadratic Equation Help
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Skip to page:
While going through a physics problem, I found following mathematical property being used.
If a > 0 and b2 - 4ac < 0, then ax2 + bx + c > 0 for all x.
Can anyone explain, why the property holds true?
Thanks in advance.
If a > 0 and b2 - 4ac < 0, then ax2 + bx + c > 0 for all x.
Can anyone explain, why the property holds true?
Thanks in advance.
0
reply
Report
#2
(Original post by tangotangopapa2)
While going through a physics problem, I found following mathematical property being used.
If a > 0 and b2 - 4ac < 0, then ax2 + bx + c > 0 for all x.
Can anyone explain, why the property holds true?
Thanks in advance.
While going through a physics problem, I found following mathematical property being used.
If a > 0 and b2 - 4ac < 0, then ax2 + bx + c > 0 for all x.
Can anyone explain, why the property holds true?
Thanks in advance.
0
reply
(Original post by ghostwalker)
Are you familiar with the formula for the roots of a quadratic equation?
Are you familiar with the formula for the roots of a quadratic equation?
0
reply
Report
#4




The general solution to the quadratic you gave is

If

For example if is

3
reply
Report
#5
(Original post by tangotangopapa2)
Yes. I am.
Yes. I am.
b2 - 4ac < 0 implies tha the quadratic has no real roots, i.e. it does not cross the x-axis. So, it is always positive or always negative.
If, in addition, a>0, then as x goes off to infinity, so ax2 + bx + c goes off to infinity, i.e. it's positive from some point onwards.
Putting the two together, since it must be positive at some point, it is always positive.
1
reply
Report
#6
Well, first, that's incorrect - if b2 - 4ac < 0 then there's no real solution of x.
b2 - 4ac is known as the discriminant of the quadratic. If < 0, there's real solutions, if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes), and if > 0, then there's two different real solutions of the quadratic.
It's shown as part of the quadratic formula
where it's evident that it cannot be solved if the discriminant is less than zero.
It's actually derived by completing the square. For the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0:
x^2 + (b/a)x + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 - (b/2a)2 + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 = (b/2a)2 - c/a
As the LHS is a square:
(b/2a)2 - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - 4ac/4a2≥ 0
(b2 - 4ac)/4a2≥ 0
And therefore, as 4a2 is always positive, b2 - 4ac ≥ 0 for there to be real solutions of x.
b2 - 4ac is known as the discriminant of the quadratic. If < 0, there's real solutions, if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes), and if > 0, then there's two different real solutions of the quadratic.
It's shown as part of the quadratic formula

where it's evident that it cannot be solved if the discriminant is less than zero.
It's actually derived by completing the square. For the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0:
x^2 + (b/a)x + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 - (b/2a)2 + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 = (b/2a)2 - c/a
As the LHS is a square:
(b/2a)2 - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - 4ac/4a2≥ 0
(b2 - 4ac)/4a2≥ 0
And therefore, as 4a2 is always positive, b2 - 4ac ≥ 0 for there to be real solutions of x.
1
reply
(Original post by B_9710)
is called the disriminant of the quadratic equation, it tells us of the nature of the roots, if
then the equation has complex roots (non real), if
then the equation has a repeated root (one root basically where the curve is tangent to the x-axis) and if
then the equation has 2 distinct real roots.
The general solution to the quadratic you gave is
. So if the expression inside the square root is negative then it cannot possibly be a real number. Basically the discriminant tells us the curve crosses the x-axis or not.
If
then the curve y does not cross the x-axis, if a>0 this means that the curve lies completely above the x axis. If a<0 it means that the curve is always under the x axis.
For example if is
, what would the value of x be? Certainly no real number, so it cannot cross the x axis right.




The general solution to the quadratic you gave is

If

For example if is

0
reply
(Original post by ghostwalker)
Good, that saves a lot of LaTex.
b2 - 4ac < 0 implies tha the quadratic has no real roots, i.e. it does not cross the x-axis. So, it is always positive or always negative.
If, in addition, a>0, then as x goes off to infinity, so ax2 + bx + c goes off to infinity, i.e. it's positive from some point onwards.
Putting the two together, since it must be positive at some point, it is always positive.
Good, that saves a lot of LaTex.
b2 - 4ac < 0 implies tha the quadratic has no real roots, i.e. it does not cross the x-axis. So, it is always positive or always negative.
If, in addition, a>0, then as x goes off to infinity, so ax2 + bx + c goes off to infinity, i.e. it's positive from some point onwards.
Putting the two together, since it must be positive at some point, it is always positive.
0
reply
(Original post by Alexion)
Well, first, that's incorrect - if b2 - 4ac < 0 then there's no real solution of x.
b2 - 4ac is known as the discriminant of the quadratic. If < 0, there's real solutions, if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes), and if > 0, then there's two different real solutions of the quadratic.
It's shown as part of the quadratic formula
where it's evident that it cannot be solved if the discriminant is less than zero.
It's actually derived by completing the square. For the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0:
x^2 + (b/a)x + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 - (b/2a)2 + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 = (b/2a)2 - c/a
As the LHS is a square:
(b/2a)2 - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - 4ac/4a2≥ 0
(b2 - 4ac)/4a2≥ 0
And therefore, as 4a2 is always positive, b2 - 4ac ≥ 0 for there to be real solutions of x.
Well, first, that's incorrect - if b2 - 4ac < 0 then there's no real solution of x.
b2 - 4ac is known as the discriminant of the quadratic. If < 0, there's real solutions, if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes), and if > 0, then there's two different real solutions of the quadratic.
It's shown as part of the quadratic formula

where it's evident that it cannot be solved if the discriminant is less than zero.
It's actually derived by completing the square. For the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0:
x^2 + (b/a)x + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 - (b/2a)2 + c/a = 0
(x + b/2a)2 = (b/2a)2 - c/a
As the LHS is a square:
(b/2a)2 - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - c/a ≥ 0
(b2/4a2) - 4ac/4a2≥ 0
(b2 - 4ac)/4a2≥ 0
And therefore, as 4a2 is always positive, b2 - 4ac ≥ 0 for there to be real solutions of x.
But question does not ask for equality. It asks for inequality.
0
reply
Report
#10
(Original post by Alexion)
if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes)
if = 0, there's two identical solutions (one, for all intents and purposes)
???
It's simple - there's just one. Not 2 identical ones

0
reply
Report
#12
(Original post by tangotangopapa2)
Thank you very much.
Is the converse also true?
i.e if the equation is positive for all values of x then, a>0 and discriminant<0?
Thank you very much.
Is the converse also true?
i.e if the equation is positive for all values of x then, a>0 and discriminant<0?
0
reply
Report
#13

1
reply
I'm gonna use it where ever possible . :d
0
reply
Report
#15
(Original post by tangotangopapa2)
Cool. Took the ratio of two formulas and ans is 1. Verified.
I'm gonna use it where ever possible . :d
Cool. Took the ratio of two formulas and ans is 1. Verified.
I'm gonna use it where ever possible . :d
0
reply
(Original post by Ano123)
They are just really the same formula, just rationalise the denominator to get to the more conventional one. Advantage of this one though is that it gives you a solution even if a=0.
They are just really the same formula, just rationalise the denominator to get to the more conventional one. Advantage of this one though is that it gives you a solution even if a=0.
Anyway thanks.
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by tangotangopapa2)
Ah. It falsely gives you two roots for linear equation. Though the second root is undefined, does it not violate one of the fundamental theorems of algebra? A nth degree equation has n-roots, no more.
Anyway thanks.
Ah. It falsely gives you two roots for linear equation. Though the second root is undefined, does it not violate one of the fundamental theorems of algebra? A nth degree equation has n-roots, no more.
Anyway thanks.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
Back
to top
to top