How not to solve a cubic...
Excerpt: Students are invited to find a cubic which can (surprisingly) be partially solved using an obviously incorrect method.
Warm-up
Can you find a cubic and quadratic graph that both pass through the -axis at ?
Are these curves unique?
You might find it helpful to use graphing software such as Desmos.
Problem
A student was trying to solve the cubic
Unfortunately, they thought they were dealing with the quadratic and used the quadratic formula. They got the two solutions , neither of which is a root of the original cubic.
Could this wrong method ever work?
Can you find a cubic equation where (at least) one of the roots of the corresponding quadratic is also a root of the cubic?
Suggestion
Can you sketch what a solution to this problem might look like? What are the important features on this sketch?
How can we use algebra to express the condition that the cubic and quadratic share a root?
Things you might have noticed
Before diving into this question we might begin by taking a step back to think about what it is asking us to find.
-
Can we represent the problem graphically?
-
Do we expect there to be a unique solution?
We are essentially looking for a quadratic and cubic curve that both pass through a given point (or pair of points) on the -axis. It feels as though there may be lots of pairs of curves like this, and indeed we may have already found an example of a cubic and quadratic curve that each pass through in the Warm-up problem.
But are both equations in the form and as required?
This constraint narrows down the problem. We might need to consider algebraic representations of the problem to help us make progress.
Let’s label the quadratic and cubic equations
and
so that
Now if and , so that is a root of both equations, we can write We can now equate the left hand sides to get . Subtracting gives , and this is only true for or . (It is also true if , but then we don’t have a cubic equation, so we can ignore this possibility.)
Did you remember to consider the possibility that ?
If
, there is a common root at
, so
and we can rewrite the equations as
How did we know that in this case?
You might like to use the GeoGebra applet below to convince yourself of our findings so far. You can adjust the sliders to see how the functions change for different values of and (but with our common root staying fixed at ).
[interactive embed (geogebra-iframe): //www.geogebratube.org/material/iframe/id/nUtPxpV2/width/600/height/400/border/888888/rc/false/ai/false/sdz/false/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
Can you adjust the sliders to find a case where the functions share two roots?
Is this case unique or can you find another?
Where do you expect the second shared root to be?
We began this line of thinking by considering the case where . How might we now consider the other possibility that , so there is a common root at ?
By the factor theorem we can say that if and , so that is a root of both equations, we also have as a factor of both and . So in this case, is a factor of both and .
[interactive embed (geogebra-iframe): //www.geogebratube.org/material/iframe/id/mZmRVEWX/width/600/height/400/border/888888/rc/false/ai/false/sdz/false/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
What’s the same and what’s different about this GeoGebra applet, when compared to the first one?
Can you suggest a pair of functions for which is a root but is not?
Looking at the graph, it is also interesting to think about the behaviour of the graphs at the points where they meet: how do the behaviours at and compare?
On reflection…
When we reflected on our approach, we realised that there is an easier way to think about the problem.
Where do the cubic and quadratic graphs intersect?
The intersections
The original question asks when are and both true. This means in particular that we require the cubic and quadratic to intersect, so we need .
If we now subtract from this, we get . Therefore the cubic and quadratic always intersect at and !
We can now finish the problem off by determining whether at either of these points. There will be a (shared) root at if and only if , and a (shared) root at if and only if . And we are done!
An alternative algebraic approach
One way to approach this problem using algebra is to write the cubic and quadratic in terms of their roots. Let us assume that is a common root, let the other roots of the cubic be and , and the other root of the quadratic be . Then we can write the cubic as and the quadratic as .
We could now expand the left hand sides to get and
Equating coefficients (and noting
throughout, as the first equation is a cubic), we obtain:
Now all that is left to do is to solve these equations!
Solving the equations
Looking at equation , which we can rearrange as , we see that either or .
Case 1:
This means that , so the equations are and .
Is there any choice for and which would mean that both roots of the quadratic are roots of the cubic?
Case 2:
If we substitute this into , we get which simplifies to , so (bringing us back to Case 1) or .
In the latter case, equation then gives , so the cubic and quadratic share the root , and they become or where .
Is there any choice here which would mean that both roots of the quadratic are roots of the cubic?
Is there another way of seeing why would give a common root of ? And is it always the case that if is a root of , then it is also a root of ?