Je bent je ingevulde velden bij deze pagina aan het verwijderen. Ben je zeker dat je dit wilt doen?
You are erasing your filled-in fields on this page. Are you sure that is what you want?
Nieuwe Versie BeschikbaarNew Version Available
Er is een update van deze pagina. Als je update naar de meest recente versie, verlies je mogelijk je huidige antwoorden voor deze pagina. Hoe wil je verdergaan ?
There is an updated version of this page. If you update to the most recent version, then your current progress on this page will be erased. Regardless, your record of completion will remain. How would you like to proceed?
This section is on how to solve absolute value equalities.
The Video!
_
The Text!
It’s one thing to understand the analytic definition of an absolute value, but it can be remarkably tricky at times to understand
how to utilize that definition to solve an equality that has an absolute value in it. This is especially true given the subtleties
involved in the solution. Consider the following equation:
The first step to solving any absolute value equality is to break it into cases, according to the piecewise definition. In this case,
we could rewrite the absolute value part as follows:
We then plug these two possibilities into the original equality in, but we must keep track of the domain
restriction.
Case 1: (Assume )
Under this assumption we have that , so our original equality becomes which we can solve to get
.
Case 2: (Assume )
Under this assumption we have that , so our original equality becomes which we can solve to get
.
Finally, we want to verify that the solutions we came up with are in the correct domains. In our example, we have that was a solution
under the requirement that . Since , this is a valid solution. Similarly, the solution is only a solution under the requirement
that . Since , this is also a valid solution. If in doubt, you can always plug your solutions back into the original problem
to verify that they work!
Now let’s consider another example.
Again, we want to take the content of the absolute value and replace it with the piecewise definition. In this case we
have:
Thus we break our original equality into two cases, just as before:
Case 1: (Assume )
Under this assumption we have that . So our original equality becomes which we can rearrange and
factor to get which gives the solutions and .
Case 2: (Assume )
Under this assumption we have that . So our original equality becomes which we can rearrange and
factor to get which gives the solutions and .
Thus we have the two solutions and under the assumption . Since neither of these solutions are (strictly) less than , neither
of these solutions are valid.
Next we have the two solutions and under the assumption . Since is not greater than or equal to , that solution is not
valid. However, the solution is valid here.
Notice that was a solution in both cases and, although was not valid in the first case, it is valid in the second case, which is
why it is a valid solution.
Again, if this is somewhat difficult to parse, remember that you can always plug in all the potential solutions into your original
equation to see which ones work. For example;
Solution 1:
Solution 2:
Solution 3:
The only one that satisfied our equation is the second solution, , as we saw earlier.