• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Solving Cubic equations or polynomials of greater order

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Solving Cubic equations or polynomials of greater order

Quadratic

I firstly solved our quadratic equations using factorising, this worked well until I found equations that have factors that are not whole. I used the formula for these equations, although the formula is very hard to remember and if it’s written incorrectly the answer will be wrong, so I tried using graphs this was ok although the graphs are not very accurate, they are only around 1 decimal place.

Factorise

  X² - 6x + 5

 (x – 5) (x – 1) = 0

x = 5 or x = 1

Solve using formula

  • b +/- √ b² - 4acimage00.png

2a

+ 6 +/- √ 36 – 4 x 1 x -5image00.png

                2 x 1

+ 6 + √ 56        or         + 6 - √ 56image00.pngimage00.png

          2                               2

Cubic

Here I first tried solving the equations by factorising, as with the quadratic equations this worked well until I came across equations with factors including decimal places. For these I tried as before to use the formula but I firstly need to find one of the factors, and if all factors include decimal places this can be difficult. So I lastly

...read more.

Middle

x + 1 √ x³ - 4x² + x + 6

        - x³ + x²

              - 5x² + ximage09.png

            - - 5x² - 5x

                      6x + 6image09.png

                   -  6x + 6image09.png

(x + 1) (x² - 5x + 6)

(x + 1) (x – 3) (x – 2)

Change of Sign

There are three types:-

  1. Interval Estimation which includes
  1. Decimal Search
  2. Interval Bisection
  1. Linear Interpolation

I have decided to use decimal search.

In order to use this method I must find an approximate root. I have already drawn the graph and so I can see that there is a root that lies between 1 and 2.

From my graph I know the root is 2.8 correct to one decimal place. With decimal search to find a more accurate value for the root I must look for a change of sign to locate the root. With decimal search after each iteration I divide the interval into 10 equal parts.

  • Step 1 – Once a root is found, you use increments of firstly 0.1 working out the value for the function. You do this until a change of sign is found.
  • Step 2 – There is a change of sign, therefore there is a root. Having narrowed down the interval, you continue with increments of 0.001. looking for a change of sign.
  • Step 3 – This process is continued to find a more accurate root, which is usually a value correct to 5 decimal places.

Whilst using the change of sign method to locate accurate values for roots I came across some equations where there is a root but the change of sign method does not show the root, this is because there is no change of sign. I feel this method is not reliable enough as it does not find all roots. I am now going to research other methods of finding roots.

Fixed point iteration

In fixed point iteration you find a single value as your estimate for the x value. This involves an interactive process a method of generating a sequence of numbers by continued repetition of the same procedure. If the numbers obtained in this manner approach some limiting value, they are said to converge to this value.

  • Step 1 – With the chosen equation, you must rearrange it in the form x = g ’ (x). This provides the basis for the iterative formula.
  • Step 2 – Choose a start value for x.
  • Step 3 – Find the corresponding value of g ‘ (x).
...read more.

Conclusion

x values oscillate about the root.

If the equation is arranged in some ways the equation will not converge as x = g ‘ (x)will only converge to a root if    -1 < g ‘ (x) < 1     for values of x close to the root.

image02.pngimage03.pngimage10.pngimage01.pngimage11.png

image12.png

Newton Raphson

Another fixed point estimation method, and as with the previous method it is necessary to use an estimate of the root as a starting point.

  • Step 1 - You start with an estimate, x1, for a root of f ’ (x) = 0.            
  • Step 2 – You then draw a tangent to the curve Y = f ‘ (x) at the point (x1, f ‘ (x)).
  • Step 3 – The point at which the tangent cuts the x axis then gives the next approximation for the root.
  • Step 4 – This process is then repeated until the values converge.

image13.pngimage04.pngimage05.png

I have come across a few problems with this method also as if a poor starting value is chosen, the iteration may diverge. Or the tangent may meet the axis at a point outside the domain of the function. If this happens you will not locate the root, even if it is there.

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    C3 Coursework - different methods of solving equations.

    5 star(s)

    requires no complex calculations whatsoever except subbing in X values into the original equation. But with Computers being able to do even that, it makes it even easier to use it. So the only human interaction needed is to look at the results and manually looking at between which two points (limits)

  2. Marked by a teacher

    The Gradient Function

    5 star(s)

    The general pattern here is that 3(nxn-1) is the general formula to find out the gradient function, where a = 3. The next investigation of 3x4 will help me to find a pattern in general. 3x4 x y second value x second value y gradient 4 768 4.1 847.7283 827.052 4 768 4.01 775.708848 773.7744 4 768

  1. Numerical solutions of equations

    x1 = 0.5 x2 = 1 x3 = -1.148698 x4 = -1.268010 x5 = -1.346816 I can immediately see that there is no convergence in this rearrangement towards the particular root I am looking for, that I found in the previous rearrangement (Rearrangement 2).

  2. Mathematical equations can be solved in many ways; however some equations cannot be solved ...

    � It allows us to find the intervals of the values very easily. � It has the greatest possibility of failing.

  1. In this coursework I will be looking at equations that cannot be solved algebraically

    Here is a graph of the function: It has three roots that lie within the integer bounds [-1,0], [1,2] and [2,3]. I will solve the root between [2, 3] This method begins with a line being drawn up from the highest integer bound of the root (in this case it will be 3)

  2. C3 COURSEWORK - comparing methods of solving functions

    Also, if the too roots are too close together, we might miss the other two after finding the first one. Consequently, we would be unlikely to seach further in the intervals. Despite the fact that x=g(x) method also involved some calculations, it?s not the quickest way to find all the

  1. Fractals. In order to create a fractal, you will need to be acquainted ...

    + z0 ever lands outside of the circle of radius 2 centered at the origin, then this orbit definitely tends to infinity. Therefore, 2i does not exist in the Mandelbrot since it quickly leaves the boundary after only one iteration: z0 = 0 z1 = 0 + 2i Enough of

  2. Evaluating Three Methods of Solving Equations.

    This method like the rest, does not work for every situation. Take the equation 0 = 5x3+x-1 which rearranges to x = 1-5x3. As you can see, after every iteration, the x-value diverges away from the root. This is because of the gradient at the root.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work