We all know how to solve the equation \(mx+n=0\) (\(m,n\) are constants).The answer is of course \(-\dfrac nm\).
Then what if one day we forget about how to solve \(ax+b=0\),but remember the quadratic formula for \(ax^2+bx+c=0\)?\[x=\frac {-b \pm \sqrt {b^2-4ac}}{2a}\]
I have 2 ways:
1.\(mx+n=0,x(mx+n)=0\).Solve for \(mx^2+nx+0=0\),place \(a\rightarrow m,b\rightarrow n,c\rightarrow0\),we get \[x=\frac{-n\pm\sqrt{n^2-4m\times0}}{2m}=\frac{-n\pm|n|}{2m}=\frac{-n\pm n}{2m}=0\text{ or }-\frac nm\] That \(0\) is of course not a root.So the root is \(-\dfrac nm\)
2.Solve for \(0x^2+mx+n=0\),place \(a\rightarrow0,b\rightarrow m,c\rightarrow n\).
Wait,\(a\) can't be \(0\) ! Try using L'Hopital.
If \(m>0\),then \(\displaystyle\lim_{a\to 0}\frac{-m-\sqrt{m^2-4na}}{2a}\) doesn't exist. \[\lim_{a\to 0}\frac{-m+\sqrt{m^2-4na}}{2a}=\lim_{a\to0}\frac{\dfrac{\partial}{\partial a}(-m+\sqrt{m^2-4na}) }{\dfrac{\partial}{\partial a}( 2a)}=\lim_{a\to0}\dfrac{\dfrac{-4n}{2\sqrt{m^2-4na}}}{2}=\frac{-n}{|m|}=-\frac nm\]
If \(m<0\),then \(\displaystyle\lim_{a\to 0}\frac{-m+\sqrt{m^2-4na}}{2a}\) doesn't exist. \[\lim_{a\to 0}\frac{-m-\sqrt{m^2-4na}}{2a}=\lim_{a\to0}\frac{\dfrac{\partial}{\partial a}(-m-\sqrt{m^2-4na}) }{\dfrac{\partial}{\partial a}( 2a)}=\lim_{a\to0}\dfrac{\dfrac{4n}{2\sqrt{m^2-4na}}}{2}=\frac{n}{|m|}=-\frac nm\]
Can anyone think of other ways of solving \(mx+n=0\)?
Note by
X X
3 months, 1 week ago
Easy Math Editor
*italics*or_italics_**bold**or__bold__paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)> This is a quote# I indented these lines # 4 spaces, and now they show # up as a code block. print "hello world"2 \times 32^{34}a_{i-1}\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{2}\sum_{i=1}^3\sin \theta\boxed{123}Comments
Sort by:
Top NewestWe could multiply both sides by \(mx - n\). Then \((mx + n)(mx - n) = 0(mx - n)\) becomes \(m^2x^2 - n^2 = 0\), and using the quadratic formula this solves to \(x = \frac{-0 \pm \sqrt{0^2 - 4m^2(-n^2)}}{2m^2}\) or \(x = \pm \frac{n}{m}\). Then checking for extraneous solutions, we would eliminate \(x = \frac{n}{m}\) and keep \(x = -\frac{n}{m}\).
Log in to reply
Thank you.I haven't think of this one.
Log in to reply
An alternate spin on your approach would be to start with \(mx + n = 0 \) and square both sides.
\[ m^2 x^2 + 2 m n x + n^2 = 0 \\ x = \frac{-2 m n \pm \sqrt{4 m^2 n^2 - 4 m^2 n^2}}{2 m^2} = -\frac{n}{m} \]
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
Log in to reply
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!
Log in to reply