When can this equation involving algebraic fractions hold?
Question
In this question, and are distinct, non-zero real numbers, and is a real number.
- Show that, if and are either both positive or both negative, then the equation has two distinct real solutions.
- Show that the equation has exactly one real solution if . Show that this equation can be written and deduce that it can only hold if .
Suggestion
How can we handle equations which involve fractions? Does it make a difference if is in the denominator?
This interactive applet shows the graph of . You can change the values of and .
[interactive embed (geogebra-iframe): //www.geogebratube.org/material/iframe/id/VAbYspuB/width/600/height/400/border/888888/rc/false/ai/false/sdz/true/smb/false/stb/false/stbh/false/ld/false/sri/true/asb/false/at/html5] — not part of the text import; see the source page.
Download GeoGebra file
The blue lines are the lines which intersect the red curve exactly once.
Solution
Clearly and . We multiply through by to clear the denominators, and get the equation which, after multiplying out and rearranging, becomes This equation will have two distinct real roots () as long as , which happens exactly when and are either both positive or both negative.
We multiply through by as in the first part, this time finding, for not equal to or , that Expanding this gives which rearranges to the quadratic
We know that a quadratic equation has one (repeated) real solution if and only if the discriminant is equal to zero.
So the quadratic has one real solution if and only if Expanding this gives that is, Rearranging this yields the result we desire: the equation has exactly one real solution if and only if
Looking at the equation we have and the equation we’d like to get to, it would be good if we could prove that
Expanding, we see that and so
Looking closely at the equation we see that since we must have .
Furthermore, since is real, we must have . However, if and only if (using our first expression for ). But we were told at the beginning that and were both non-zero, so this cannot happen.
So .
In fact, we were also told that and are distinct, so we cannot have , and hence we cannot have either. So .
A subtle point; the question is worded as “show that can only hold if ”, where and are statements.
(Here is the statement “”, while is the statement “”.)
The statement means “if is true, then must also be true”. This is different from saying “ if ”, which means “if is true, then must also be true”. The two statements are converses of each other. The converse of a true result is sometimes, but not always, true, and we must take care to ensure that we know which statement we are attempting to prove.