Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Synthetic Division Question?
I m asked to express f(x) in the form f(x) = (x-k)q(x)+r for a given value of k: f(x)=5x^3+x^2+x-7. I understand how to do synthetic division, what I don t understand is what the form (x-k)q(x)+r for a given value of k is.
Can somebody please clue me in?
So if f(x) = 5x^3+x^2+x-7; and k = -1, my synthetic division answer is 5x^2-4x+5-(12/x+1). How do I express that in the form f(x) = (x-k)q(x)+r for the given value of k?
3 Answers
- Anonymous6 years agoFavorite Answer
Yes, you have f(x)/(x+1) = 5x^2-4x+5-(12/x+1). You did that correctly.
Now multiply by x+1 and you get it into the form you are asked for:
f(x) = (x+1)(5x^2 - 4x + 5) - 12
q(x) is 5x^2 - 4x + 5
Remainder is -12
You got the quotient q(x) = 5x^2 - 4x + 5 when you did the synthetic division, and -12 was the remainder.
I think you are overthinking things. You did it exactly right, but are a bit confused about what it all means.
It's just like dividing numbers.
If you divide 103 by 4, you get 25, remainder of 3.
You could also say 103/4 = 25 + 3/4.
Or you could say 103 = 25x4 + 3. There, 25 is like q(x), and 3 is the remainder.
Maybe you are confused since q(x) is only PART of the whole quotient, since there is a remainder. So calling it the quotient is a bit inaccurate.
See http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PolynomialQuotient.ht... which defines "Polynomial Quotient" as the q(x) part, dropping the remainder.
What's going on is that you are trying to work with just polynomials, and 12/(x+1) is not a polynomial, so how are you going to express the division of one polynomial by another?
Imagine you are working with integers, and don't know what a fraction is. So you can't always divide perfectly. 100/4 = 25 makes sense, but what is 103/4? You get 25, but then you have 3 left over. So you might say the "integer quotient" is 25. Some programming languages might do exactly that if you try to divide 103 by 4 and assign it to an integer (or you might have to specifically ask for "integer division," perhaps by using \ instead of /).
You have the same problem when working with polynomials. You want the answer to be expressed as just polynomials. So you get f(x) = (x+1)q(x) + r, where r, or perhaps r(x), will have a smaller degree than the divisor. So while -12/(x+1) is completely correct, you left the realm of polynomials and came up with a rational function. All the question asks is that you not do that, and express the answer as a Polynomial Quotient as defined at the site I gave you the link to, plus a polynomial remainder (a constant -12 being a polynomial of degree 0, -12x^0).
By the way, as others have noted, -12 is going to end up being f(-1). That's because when you plug in -1 into f(x) = (x+1)(5x^2 - 4x + 5) - 12, the (x+1) term will be 0 and you will be left with -12. That may or may not be relevant to what you are studying. It's definitely something you should be aware of. But if you are dividing by a larger degree polynomial, say (x^2 + x + 1), then the remainder isn't easily expressible as some value of f(x), and will most probably be a polynomial of degree 1 (I haven't checked). In that situation, you will need to use polynomial long division, not simple synthetic division. (When I was in school, all that was classified as synthetic division, but when dividing by x-k, it can be done more simply.)
I hope that helps.
- husoskiLv 76 years ago
It sounds to me like this is leading up to the fact that the remainder term r will be equal to f(k) when dividing by (x - k).
The division algorithm (or "division theorem") guarantees that you can write:
f(x) = q(x)(x - k) + r
The proof often begins with the phrase "Express f(x) in the form...". The division algorithm says that such a form exists and is unique.
The rest of the proof is simple. Given the above representation then:
f(k) = q(x)(k - k) + r = 0 + r = r
That's the only context I can think of. You certainly can't write down such an easy formula for the coefficients of q in terms of k and the coefficients of f.