How do you find the zeros of the function f(x)=(x^2−x−12)/(x^2+2x−35)?

Jamar Hays 2022-09-13 Answered
How do you find the zeros of the function f ( x ) = x 2 - x - 12 x 2 + 2 x - 35 ?
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

trabadero2l
Answered 2022-09-14 Author has 15 answers
to find the zeros equate the numerator to zero and solve
solve x 2 - x - 12 = 0
The factors of - 12 which sum to - 1 are - 4 and + 3
( x - 4 ) ( x + 3 ) = 0
equate each factor to zero and solve for x
x - 4 = 0 x = 4
x + 3 = 0 x = - 3
graph{(x^2-x-12)/(x^2+2x-35 [-10, 10, -5, 5]}

We have step-by-step solutions for your answer!

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2021-02-25
True or False. The graph of a rational function may intersect a horizontal asymptote.
asked 2021-06-16

Use substitution to convert the integrals to integrals of rational functions. Then use partial fractions to evaluate the integrals.
12+exdx

asked 2022-06-14
I was bored in my Algebra 2 class and wanted to try to illustrate the tan(x) function as an infinite summation of rational functions.
I recalled that the solution to a rational function's numerator is equivalent to the roots of the function. The denominator's solution is the vertical asymptote(s). Since tan(x) has infinite roots and asymptotes, if I expressed it as a rational function it'd be infinitely long. My teacher suggested just using an infinite summation of rational functions, so I did that instead.
The first thing I did was set up the numerator and denominator so that they could each equal the corresponding roots and asymptotes; since it's (sorta? kinda? maybe) an even function, I just used variations of x ± π for both sides. Given that all roots of tan(x) are whole multiples of pi and all asymptotes are odd multiples of pi/2, I came up with the following equation:
n = x ± n π x ± 2 n 1 ) π 2
Where n is any integer from negative infinity to infinity, my idea is that the end product of this is tan(x). Is this even remotely correct or did I leave something out? Thanks!
(I do recognize that the horizontal asymptote is apparently 1 with this equation, but when I plot a section of this in desmos it seems to pass through y=1 anyway. There might be something going on that I could simplify in terms of rewriting an "x^2" somewhere, or maybe I'm just trippin.)
asked 2022-07-12
If k is a field in which 1 + 1 0, prove that 1 x 2 is not a rational function. Hint. Mimic the classical proof that 2 is irrational
It seems rather odd to discuss the square root function in the context of an arbitrary field, but here goes nothing!
Proof:
Suppose that 1 x 2 is a rational function in k ( x ). Then there exist polynomials p ( x ) and q ( x ) 0 that are relatively prime with 1 x 2 = p ( x ) q ( x ) ; clearly we may take p ( x ) 0. Then 1 x 2 = p ( x ) 2 q ( x ) 2 or q ( x ) 2 ( 1 x 2 ) = p ( x ) 2 , which says q | p 2 , and since q | q 2 , we can infer q | p 2 . Moreover, since p | p 2 and ( p , q ) = 1, then p q | p 2 or q | p, which contradicts the fact that the polynomials are relatively prime. Hence 1 x 2 cannot be a rational function.
How does this sound? Aside from the problem of discussing –     in the context of an arbitrary field, I am worried about not using the fact that 1 + 1 0, at least not explicitly. Where exactly is this assumed used, if at all?
EDIT:
Suppose that q ( x ) = 1, and let f ( x ) = a n x n + . . . a 1 x + a 0 . Then 1 x 2 = f ( x ) 2 . If x = 0, 1 = a 0 2 and therefore a 0 must be a unit. Letting x = 1 we get 0 = ( a n + . . . + a 1 + a 0 ) 2 ; and letting x = 1 we get 0 = ( a n . . . a 1 + a 0 ) 2 . Since we are working in a field, there can be no nonzero nilpotent which means that a n + . . . + a 1 + a 0 and a n . . . a 1 + a 0 are both zero. Adding the two equations together yields 2 a 0 = 0, and since 1 + 1 0, a 0 = 0 which contradicts the fact that a 0 is a unit.
How does this sound?
Another attemtpt:
If f ( x ) 2 = 1 x 2 , then 2 = deg ( f 2 ) = 2 deg ( f ) implies deg ( f ) = 1. Yet if x = 1, we get f ( 1 ) 2 = 1 1 = 0 and therefore f ( 1 ) = 0 since there are no nonzero nilpotent elements in a field; similarly, f ( 1 ) = 0. Since 1 + 1 0, f has two distinct roots in k yet is only a 1-st degree polynomial, a contradiction.
asked 2022-05-23
Could any one give me a hint how to show Every rational function which is holomorphic on every point of Riemann Sphere( C ) must be constant?(with out applying Maximum Modulas Theorem). Thanks.
asked 2022-09-03
Suppose y varies inversely with x, how do you write an equation for the inverse variation if y = -2 when x = 1.2?
asked 2022-09-17
How do you graph f ( x ) = x x 2 - 1 using holes, vertical and horizontal asymptotes, x and y intercepts?

New questions