• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Harder 3U question (1 Viewer)

apollo1

Banned
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
938
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Picture 4.png

i used the discriminant for part (i) and got the required expression. but i didnt know what to put as my explanation.
 

math man

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
503
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
As a>o the original integral has to also be > 0 (due to the square) so that means a, b and c in the quadratic are greater than 0, and we form a positive definite quadratic, we know its positive definite as a and c will be greater than b
 

4025808

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
4,377
Location
中國農村稻農
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Uni Grad
2017
basically state that

then


also state that a > 0

then do what you did to follow on. From there onwards you should be fine.
 
Last edited:

apollo1

Banned
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
938
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
As a>o the original integral has to also be > 0 (due to the square) so that means a, b and c in the quadratic are greater than 0, and we form a positive definite quadratic, we know its positive definite as a and c will be greater than b
cool thanks. and also thanks to 4025808.
 

math man

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
503
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
From i) we know that:




if we let:



into the above inequality we get:



which simplifies to:



and now part ii) is done.

For part iii) first we square the inequality from ii) to get:



So now to finish this question we have to prove that:



To do this we let:



for part i, which gives us:



this simplifies to:



so now we sub this result into:



which yields:



and we are done.

For part iii) we couldn't let:



as this obviously looks stupid, so we let f(x)=1 and
as mentioned above
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top