Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

111. We will add another example to show, that the expression

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Now, if we perform the division the quotient will be 1; and if we make x=1, there will result

[blocks in formation]

If we perform the division, the quotient will be 1+x; then making x=1, the expression becomes

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

112. We will add another example showing the value of the ex

[blocks in formation]

Take the equation ax=b, involving one unknown quantity, whence

b

[ocr errors][merged small]

1st. If, for a particular supposition made with reference to the given quantities of the question, we have a=0, there results

=

b

Now in this case the equation becomes 0Xx=b, and evidently

cannot be satisfied by any finite value of x. We will however remark

that, as the equation can be put under the form

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

less from 0, and the equation will become more and more exact; so

that, we may take a value for x so great that

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

It is in consequence of this that algebraists say, that infinity satisfies the equation in this case; and there are some questions for which this kind of result forms a true solution; at least, it is certain that the equation does not admit of a solution in finite numbers, and this is all that we wish to prove.

2d. If we have a= =0, b=0, at the same time, the value of x

[blocks in formation]

In this case, the equation becomes 0×x=0, and every finite number, positive or negative, substituted for x, will satisfy the equation. Therefore the equation, or the problem of which it is the algebraic translation, is indeterminate.

113. It should be observed, that the expression

does not al

ways indicate an indetermination, it frequently indicates only the existence of a common factor to the two terms of the fraction, which factor becomes nothing, in consequence of a particular hypothesis. For example, suppose that we find for the solution of a problem, a3-b3

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

If, in this formula, a is made equal to b, there results

But it will be observed, that a3-63 can be put under the form (a—b) (a2+ab+b2), (Art. 59), and that a2-b2 is equal to (a—b)

(a+b), therefore the value of x becomes

(a−b) (a2+ab+b2)

x=

(a—b) (a+b)

Now, if we suppress the common factor (a-b), before making

a2+ab+b2

the supposition a=b, the value of x becomes x= a+b

[blocks in formation]

mon to the two terms; but if we first suppress this factor, there re

[blocks in formation]

the existence of a common factor to the two terms of the fraction which reduces to this form. Therefore, before pronouncing upon the true value of the fraction, it is necessary to ascertain whether the two terms do not contain a common factor. If they do not, we conclude that the equation is really indeterminate. If they do contain one, suppress it, and then make the particular hypothesis; this will give the true value of the fraction, which will assume one of A A 0 the three forms 0 0

B

in which case, the equation is determi

nate, impossible in finite numbers, or indeterminate.

This observation is very useful in the discussion of problems.

Of Inequalities.

114. In the discussion of problems, we have often occasion to suppose several inequalities, and to perform transformations upon them, analogous to those executed upon equalities. We are often

obliged to do this, when, in discussing a problem, we wish to establish the necessary relations between the given quantities, in order that the problem may be susceptible of a direct, or at least a real solution, and to fix, with the aid of these relations, the limits between which the particular values of certain given quantities must be found, in order that the enunciation may fulfil a particular condition. Now, although the principles established for equations are in general applicable to inequalities, there are nevertheless some exceptions, of which it is necessary to speak, in order to put the beginner upon his guard against some errors that he might commit, in making use of the sign of inequality. These exceptions arise from the introduction of negative expressions into the calculus, as quantities.

In order that we may be clearly understood, we will take examples of the different transformations that inequalities may be subjected to, taking care to point out the exceptions to which these transformations are liable.

115. Two inequalities are said to subsist in the same sense, when the greater quantity stands at the left in both, or at the right in both; and in a contrary sense, when the greater quantity stands at the right in one, and at the left in the other.

Thus, 25>20 and 18>10, or 6<8 and 79,

are inequalities which subsist in the same sense; and the inequalities 15>13 and 12<14, subsist in a contrary sense.

1. If we add the same quantity to both members of an inequality, or subtract the same quantity from both members, the resulting inequality will subsist in the same sense.

Thus, take 8>6; by adding 5, we still have 8+5>6+5 and 8-5>6-—5.

When the two members of an equality are both negative, that one is the least, algebraically considered, which contains the greatest number of units. Thus, -25<-20; and if 30 be added to both members, we have 5<10. This must be understood entirely in an algebraic sense, and arises from the convention before esta

blished, to consider all quantities preceded by the minus sign, as subtractive.

The principle first enunciated, serves to transpose certain terms from one member of the inequality to the other. Take, for example, the inequality a+b>362-2a2; there will result from it a2+2a23b2-b2, or 3a2>2b2.

2. If two inequalities subsist in the same sense, and we add them member to member, the resulting inequality will also subsist in the same

sense.

Thus, from a>b, c>d, e>f, there results a+c+e>b+d+f. But this is not always the case, when we subtract, member from member, two inequalities established in the same sense.

Let there be the two inequalities 4<7 and 2<3, we have 4-2 or 2<7—3 or 4.

But if we have the inequalities 9<10 and 6<8, by subtracting we have 9-6 or 3>10-8 or 2.

We should then avoid this transformation as much as possible, or if we employ it, determine in what sense the resulting inequality exists.

3. If the two members of an inequality be multiplied by a positive number, the resulting inequality will exist in the same sense. Thus, from a<b, we deduce 3a3b; and from -a<-b, -3a<-3b.

This principle serves to make the denominators disappear.

[blocks in formation]

3a(a2—b2)>2d(c2 — d2).

The same principle is true for division.

But when the two members of an inequality are multiplied or divided by a negative number, the inequality subsists in a contrary

sense.

Take, for example, 8>7; multiplying by -3, we have -24-21.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »