Advice on solving these simultaneous (quadratic/cubic) equations?












1














I have the following simultaneous equations:



$$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0$$



$$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0$$



Where I'd like to solve for $x$ and $y$.



Obviously $a,b,c_1,c_2$ are known constants. They have the following restrictions:



$$a in [0,1]$$
$$b > 0$$
$$c_1, c_2 > 0$$



My thinking is that the above equations should give me a bunch of possible solutions, and then all but one can (hopefully) be eliminated according to restrictions that this particular problem imposes (eg. imaginary solutions are not permitted).



The only approach that I can see is to first use the quadratic formula to obtain solutions for $x$ in terms of $y$, and then substitute this into the second equation to then solve for $y$, or vise versa. But this quickly leads to an intractable (at least for me) expression. In particular, I end up with



$$x = frac{-(b+2ay)pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2 + 4a c_1}}{2a}$$



along with the equation



$$- ay^2 pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2+4ac_1}y - c_2 = 0$$



The hope is to then solve the above to obtain a solution for $y$, which can then be used to obtain the corresponding solution for $x$. But how on earth can we deal with the square root? Is this problem even solvable without resorting to a numerical solution?






systems-of-equations quadratics symmetric-polynomials







share|cite|improve this question
























  • I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:24






  • 1




    Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
    – Rhys Hughes
    Jan 4 at 3:26






  • 1




    @Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
    – user2661923
    Jan 4 at 3:31












  • And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:32










  • @DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
    – Xiaomi
    Jan 4 at 4:16


















1














I have the following simultaneous equations:



$$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0$$



$$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0$$



Where I'd like to solve for $x$ and $y$.



Obviously $a,b,c_1,c_2$ are known constants. They have the following restrictions:



$$a in [0,1]$$
$$b > 0$$
$$c_1, c_2 > 0$$



My thinking is that the above equations should give me a bunch of possible solutions, and then all but one can (hopefully) be eliminated according to restrictions that this particular problem imposes (eg. imaginary solutions are not permitted).



The only approach that I can see is to first use the quadratic formula to obtain solutions for $x$ in terms of $y$, and then substitute this into the second equation to then solve for $y$, or vise versa. But this quickly leads to an intractable (at least for me) expression. In particular, I end up with



$$x = frac{-(b+2ay)pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2 + 4a c_1}}{2a}$$



along with the equation



$$- ay^2 pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2+4ac_1}y - c_2 = 0$$



The hope is to then solve the above to obtain a solution for $y$, which can then be used to obtain the corresponding solution for $x$. But how on earth can we deal with the square root? Is this problem even solvable without resorting to a numerical solution?






systems-of-equations quadratics symmetric-polynomials







share|cite|improve this question
























  • I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:24






  • 1




    Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
    – Rhys Hughes
    Jan 4 at 3:26






  • 1




    @Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
    – user2661923
    Jan 4 at 3:31












  • And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:32










  • @DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
    – Xiaomi
    Jan 4 at 4:16
















1












1








1







I have the following simultaneous equations:



$$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0$$



$$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0$$



Where I'd like to solve for $x$ and $y$.



Obviously $a,b,c_1,c_2$ are known constants. They have the following restrictions:



$$a in [0,1]$$
$$b > 0$$
$$c_1, c_2 > 0$$



My thinking is that the above equations should give me a bunch of possible solutions, and then all but one can (hopefully) be eliminated according to restrictions that this particular problem imposes (eg. imaginary solutions are not permitted).



The only approach that I can see is to first use the quadratic formula to obtain solutions for $x$ in terms of $y$, and then substitute this into the second equation to then solve for $y$, or vise versa. But this quickly leads to an intractable (at least for me) expression. In particular, I end up with



$$x = frac{-(b+2ay)pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2 + 4a c_1}}{2a}$$



along with the equation



$$- ay^2 pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2+4ac_1}y - c_2 = 0$$



The hope is to then solve the above to obtain a solution for $y$, which can then be used to obtain the corresponding solution for $x$. But how on earth can we deal with the square root? Is this problem even solvable without resorting to a numerical solution?






systems-of-equations quadratics symmetric-polynomials







share|cite|improve this question















I have the following simultaneous equations:



$$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0$$



$$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0$$



Where I'd like to solve for $x$ and $y$.



Obviously $a,b,c_1,c_2$ are known constants. They have the following restrictions:



$$a in [0,1]$$
$$b > 0$$
$$c_1, c_2 > 0$$



My thinking is that the above equations should give me a bunch of possible solutions, and then all but one can (hopefully) be eliminated according to restrictions that this particular problem imposes (eg. imaginary solutions are not permitted).



The only approach that I can see is to first use the quadratic formula to obtain solutions for $x$ in terms of $y$, and then substitute this into the second equation to then solve for $y$, or vise versa. But this quickly leads to an intractable (at least for me) expression. In particular, I end up with



$$x = frac{-(b+2ay)pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2 + 4a c_1}}{2a}$$



along with the equation



$$- ay^2 pm sqrt{(b+2ay)^2+4ac_1}y - c_2 = 0$$



The hope is to then solve the above to obtain a solution for $y$, which can then be used to obtain the corresponding solution for $x$. But how on earth can we deal with the square root? Is this problem even solvable without resorting to a numerical solution?






systems-of-equations quadratics symmetric-polynomials




systems-of-equations quadratics symmetric-polynomials






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 9 hours ago









Harry Peter

5,46111439




5,46111439










asked Jan 4 at 3:15









XiaomiXiaomi

1,021115




1,021115












  • I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:24






  • 1




    Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
    – Rhys Hughes
    Jan 4 at 3:26






  • 1




    @Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
    – user2661923
    Jan 4 at 3:31












  • And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:32










  • @DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
    – Xiaomi
    Jan 4 at 4:16




















  • I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:24






  • 1




    Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
    – Rhys Hughes
    Jan 4 at 3:26






  • 1




    @Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
    – user2661923
    Jan 4 at 3:31












  • And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
    – Doug M
    Jan 4 at 3:32










  • @DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
    – Xiaomi
    Jan 4 at 4:16


















I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
– Doug M
Jan 4 at 3:24




I have $-ay^2 pm cdots$ in your last line.
– Doug M
Jan 4 at 3:24




1




1




Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
– Rhys Hughes
Jan 4 at 3:26




Because if $$3ay^2 pmsqrt{text{blah}}=0$$ then $$9a^2y^4-text{blah}=0$$. This is just a quartic and can be solved albeit awkwardly.
– Rhys Hughes
Jan 4 at 3:26




1




1




@Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
– user2661923
Jan 4 at 3:31






@Xiaomi Rhys Hughes approach may be best, An alternative approach is to subtract the two eqn's to create a third equation: $a(x^2 - y^2) +b(x-y) - (c_1 - c_2) = 0.$ I would ignore the 2nd equation, apply the quadratic formula to the first equation, expressing $x$ in terms of $y$, and then try to combine that with the third equation. This will result in two equations in two unknowns, one of which (the 3rd) is non-linear. If you still can't solve the problem re Rhys Hughes answer or my comment, respond, and I will take another look at it.
– user2661923
Jan 4 at 3:31














And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
– Doug M
Jan 4 at 3:32




And it sould be $+ 4ac_1$ under the radical.
– Doug M
Jan 4 at 3:32












@DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
– Xiaomi
Jan 4 at 4:16






@DougM thanks for catching that mistake. I'll try that first and check back here if I dont maake any progress
– Xiaomi
Jan 4 at 4:16












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1














You can make life simpler avoiding radicals but you will still arrive to a nasty quartic equation.



Considering $$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0 tag 1$$
$$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0 tag 2$$
eliminate $y$ from $(1)$to get (assuming $aneq 0$ and $xneq 0$)
$$y=frac{-a x^2-b x+c_1}{2 a x}tag 3$$
Plug this result in $(2)$, simplify as much as you can to get by the end
$$3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2=0 tag 4$$



Now, have fun !



I think that considering some numerical method (such as Newton) could be a good idea looking for the zero's of function
$$f(x)=3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2$$
Since $f(0)=-c_1^2 <0$, you could catch a first root (so you know that there is at least a second real root); deflate to a cubic equation (using long division) and this would be easier to handle.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061281%2fadvice-on-solving-these-simultaneous-quadratic-cubic-equations%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1














    You can make life simpler avoiding radicals but you will still arrive to a nasty quartic equation.



    Considering $$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0 tag 1$$
    $$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0 tag 2$$
    eliminate $y$ from $(1)$to get (assuming $aneq 0$ and $xneq 0$)
    $$y=frac{-a x^2-b x+c_1}{2 a x}tag 3$$
    Plug this result in $(2)$, simplify as much as you can to get by the end
    $$3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2=0 tag 4$$



    Now, have fun !



    I think that considering some numerical method (such as Newton) could be a good idea looking for the zero's of function
    $$f(x)=3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2$$
    Since $f(0)=-c_1^2 <0$, you could catch a first root (so you know that there is at least a second real root); deflate to a cubic equation (using long division) and this would be easier to handle.






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      1














      You can make life simpler avoiding radicals but you will still arrive to a nasty quartic equation.



      Considering $$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0 tag 1$$
      $$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0 tag 2$$
      eliminate $y$ from $(1)$to get (assuming $aneq 0$ and $xneq 0$)
      $$y=frac{-a x^2-b x+c_1}{2 a x}tag 3$$
      Plug this result in $(2)$, simplify as much as you can to get by the end
      $$3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2=0 tag 4$$



      Now, have fun !



      I think that considering some numerical method (such as Newton) could be a good idea looking for the zero's of function
      $$f(x)=3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2$$
      Since $f(0)=-c_1^2 <0$, you could catch a first root (so you know that there is at least a second real root); deflate to a cubic equation (using long division) and this would be easier to handle.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        1












        1








        1






        You can make life simpler avoiding radicals but you will still arrive to a nasty quartic equation.



        Considering $$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0 tag 1$$
        $$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0 tag 2$$
        eliminate $y$ from $(1)$to get (assuming $aneq 0$ and $xneq 0$)
        $$y=frac{-a x^2-b x+c_1}{2 a x}tag 3$$
        Plug this result in $(2)$, simplify as much as you can to get by the end
        $$3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2=0 tag 4$$



        Now, have fun !



        I think that considering some numerical method (such as Newton) could be a good idea looking for the zero's of function
        $$f(x)=3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2$$
        Since $f(0)=-c_1^2 <0$, you could catch a first root (so you know that there is at least a second real root); deflate to a cubic equation (using long division) and this would be easier to handle.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        You can make life simpler avoiding radicals but you will still arrive to a nasty quartic equation.



        Considering $$a x^2 + (b+2ay)x - c_1 = 0 tag 1$$
        $$ay^2 + (b+2ax)y - c_2 = 0 tag 2$$
        eliminate $y$ from $(1)$to get (assuming $aneq 0$ and $xneq 0$)
        $$y=frac{-a x^2-b x+c_1}{2 a x}tag 3$$
        Plug this result in $(2)$, simplify as much as you can to get by the end
        $$3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2=0 tag 4$$



        Now, have fun !



        I think that considering some numerical method (such as Newton) could be a good idea looking for the zero's of function
        $$f(x)=3 a^2 x^4+4a bx^3+(b^2+4 a c_2-2 a c_1 ) x^2 -c_1^2$$
        Since $f(0)=-c_1^2 <0$, you could catch a first root (so you know that there is at least a second real root); deflate to a cubic equation (using long division) and this would be easier to handle.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 4 at 6:15









        Claude LeiboviciClaude Leibovici

        119k1157132




        119k1157132






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061281%2fadvice-on-solving-these-simultaneous-quadratic-cubic-equations%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            An IMO inspired problem

            Image
            14 4 This problem from IMO 1988 is said to be one of the most elegant ones in functional equations. Problem : The function $f$ is defined on the set of all positive integers as follows: begin{align} f(1) = 1, f(3) &= 3, f(2n) = f(n), \ f(4n+1) &= 2f(2n+1) - f(n), \ f(4n+3) &= 3 f(2n+1) - 2f(n) end{align} Find the number of $n$ with $f(n) = n, 1 leq n leq 1988$. The main idea towards the solution is realizing that these conditions stand for the fact that $f(n)$ just reverses the digits in the binary representation of the number $n$. So, essentially the solution is finding the number of binary pallindromes $leq 1988_{10}$. My question is the following : How to reformulate the problem so that $f(n)$ reverses the digits of $n$ in its ternary representation. Or even better, can we reformulate it for a
            Read more

            Management

            Image
            Management From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search "Manager" redirects here. For other uses, see Management (disambiguation) and Manager (disambiguation). An organization chart for the United States Coast Guard shows the hierarchy of managerial roles in that organization. Business administration Management of a business Accounting Management accounting Financial accounting Financial audit Business entities Cooperative Corporation Limited liability company Partnership Sole proprietorship State-owned enterprise Corporate governance Annual general meeting Board of directors Supervisory board Advisory board Audit committee Corporate law Commercial law Constitutional documents Contract Corporate crime Corporate liability Insolvency law International trade law Mergers and acquisitions Economics Commodity Pu
            Read more

            Has there ever been an instance of an active nuclear power plant within or near a war zone?

            Image
            36 3 The question Has there ever been a military combat going on around an active (running or in outage but not decommissioned) commercial nuclear power plant? Or dangerously near it? If yes, how did the plant and its personnel fare in such situation? Why I ask Let's assume for the scope of this question modern commercial nuclear power plants (CANDU, PWR, BWR of generation II plus all of gen III and newer) are usually reasonably safe to operate given that the engineering has been done right and there is a whole cohort of very well trained personnel on-site at all times, well rested and with considerable resources on their hands. Things hard to get with an armed conflict like the recent Syrian war raging around. I can't seem to find any reference or a comprehensive article about this, hence this question.
            Read more