#solve for range of k.

84 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

karmic glen
#

Someone help I am struggling a lot thank you

celest cloudBOT
glad void
#

"y can assume all real values", means that the range of y should be R (the reals). Do you know how to determine the range of that function?
(Correction I said "domain" once, I meant range)

karmic glen
#

@glad void use the discriminant?

glad void
#

What have you tried? Or where are you currently?

karmic glen
#

i first factorised the denominator

#

and found that x cannot be 1 or -3, or else the denominator is zero and y would not be a real number

glad void
#

Ok good, so you know the domain of y

karmic glen
#

yes

#

then i found the discriminant of the numerator

#

but idk if thats the way to go

glad void
#

That will give you roots (zeroes) of the function, but I don't think it will help with the problem

lethal granite
#

sorry for interrupting, but i think if we make discriminant greater than or equal to zero then that should do it

karmic glen
glad void
#

You want to determine the range of y in (-inf, -3), (-3, 1) and (1, inf)

glad void
#

Those ranges together will give you the range of y

karmic glen
lethal granite
glad void
#

R = (-inf, inf), removing the poles X = -3 and x = 1, you end up with that domain

karmic glen
#

ok

glad void
#

And for each of the subdomains you should check what the function does at the boundary, and what it does in between

#

So take the limit from both directions for each of the boundaries. Thinking about this, having determined the zeroes is helpful here. Maybe a pole can be removed

#

For the insides you want to check for minima and maxima, unless you already know the range is (-inf, inf)

karmic glen
#

could you explain what a pole and a subdomain is? I am not sure

glad void
#

Poles are the zeroes of the denominator, when it is equal to zero. So the singularities of the function. x = -3 and x = 1

karmic glen
#

got it

karmic glen
glad void
#

No it's a set

karmic glen
#

oh

glad void
#

(-inf, -3) is the set of all numbers between -inf and -3

karmic glen
#

icic

glad void
karmic glen
#

ok

#

so i need to solve 3 instances for y

#

(-inf, -3), (-3, 1) and (1, inf)

glad void
#

You don't really need to solve, calculate what the function does at those boundaries

#

Well you do need to solve for which k that is

#

Is this a bonus exercise?

karmic glen
#

yes

#

its more challenging than i thought

#

cuz we just got into the topic of the nature of roots and using the discriminant

glad void
#

You can use the information from the discrimant

karmic glen
#

i got k<= 0 or k>=4 using the discriminant

#

for the numerator to have a real root

#

but here the root does not need to be real, just the value of y

#

in this case can't k be anything, say (-inf to inf) so long as x isnt equal to -3 or 1, y will have a real value

glad void
#

Well what you do know is, if there are no roots, y is never zero and thus the range is not R

karmic glen
#

oh yea if there are no roots k is not R

glad void
#

Yes

karmic glen
#

i got k ∈ (-∞, -1] ∪ [9/2, ∞)

#

i referred to a worksheet involving solution set

#

nvm scratch that

glad void
#

Oh

#

Well you do know it isn't (0, 4)

karmic glen
#

yea

glad void
#

Well now first check where the poles go to

#

Sorry, I'm not really sure what is the best way to go forward

karmic glen
#

the poles are the values when you set the discriminant to zero right

glad void
#

No when the denominator goes to zero and thus y goes to -inf or inf, unless it is a removable singularity

karmic glen
#

oh

#

wait but isnt the solution just k<= 0 or k>=4 since the numerator needs to have real roots

#

and the discriminant of the numerator is k(k-4) >= 0

#

for the roots to be real

glad void
#

Hm

karmic glen
#

and ultimately for y to be real

#

ok i think i need to sleep now its getting quite late

#

ill attempt this question tmr

#

thx for the help @glad void

#

and @lethal granite

glad void
#

If you have root, and the singularities goes to -inf and inf, then R has the whole range

glad void
#

Have a good night

karmic glen
#

u too

glad void
#

These are all asymptotes

#

Maybe I made some sign mistakes...

#

Yeah the k < and > 9/2 should be flipped

glad void
#

Also in the graph for x < -3 or x > 1 it is still possible for it to go through 1, but eventually it will go to the asymptote y = 1 again.

glad void
#

To summarize:

  • function is a rational polynomial
  • degree of numerator and denominator are the same and we have a horizontal asymptote at y = 1/1 = 1
  • function has to intersect y = 1 or the range cannot be R
  • since we have a horizontal asymptotes at +-infinity we have to look at the poles, the vertical asymptotes. Determine these, they are x = -3 and x = 1.
  • If the limits between them (positive left, negative right) have opposite signs, the range will be (-inf, inf). Determine these ks. (1)
  • For the other cases the intersection with y = 1 has to be in the regions that should span the whole range. Determine for which k and x, f(x) intersects with y = 1. (a)
  • One of these cases is that the negative left and positive right asymptotes have opposite limits. Normally you would need to check the ks and determine if the intersection (a) is at x < -3 or x > 1. (*Wait this is not true, the left and right always span everything except y = 1, so it's enough for there to be a intersection) But it turns out these k are the same as (1).
  • Another is when the negative left and positive right limits have the same sign but opposite to the positive left and negative right limits. For this the intersection (a) has to lay between (-3, 1). It turns out that this isn't the case, the only intersections take place in the left and right region when - 1/2 <= k <= 9/2

So your answer will be the ks determined at (1)

#

I guess that is it, can someone validate? 👼

glad void
#

(1) the left limits flip at k = -1/2, check which is which. The same for the right limits with k = 9/2.
Turns out the middle region spans R when k < - 1/2 or k > 9/2. (THIS IS THE ANSWER)

#

(a) when determining the intersection, it turns out there are no intersections for k in {-1/2, 2, 9/2} the first and last come from x in {1, -3}. The intersection is at x = (-k - 3)/(k -2).

#

Well that was fun, learned some algebra, about rational polynomials and it's asymptotes. Not sure how you should do this when you just learn about the zeroes. Unless there is a big shortcut...