My Math Forum What's the fallacy here in the way I'm solving this inequation?

 Algebra Pre-Algebra and Basic Algebra Math Forum

 September 22nd, 2019, 01:01 PM #1 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2019 From: Bogota Posts: 1 Thanks: 0 What's the fallacy here in the way I'm solving this inequation? Hi everyone! I'm learning inequalities. I do exercises and then use photomath app (fantastic app!) to verify my solutions. There's one inequality the app gives me a different answer to the one I'm getting at, but I can't see the mistake with the way I'm solving my inequality. Can anyone help me understand, please? Here's the inequality (x-1)/(2x+3) < 1 And here's my thinking: The best way to get rid of the denominator (2x+3) would be to multiply by it on both sides of the inequality. So : [(x-1)(2x+3)]/(2x+3) < (1)(2x+3) (x-1) < (2x+3) Then we solve for x: x-2x < 3 + 1 -x < 4 x > -4 So the solution, following my line of thought, would be x ∈ (-4,+∞) (which doesn't satisfy the inequality) However, photomath app's solution is: x ∈ (-∞, -4) ∪ (-3/2, +∞) (which sastisfies the inequality). When I go to "show solving steps", instead of multiplying by (2x+3), they subtract 1 from both sides of the inequality. I understand why and I can get their solution if I do that first too. However, I still can't understand why multiplying by (2x+3) to get rid of the fraction is wrong, and why it gives out a different solution. What's the fallacy? What am I not factoring in? I thank you all! Last edited by skipjack; September 22nd, 2019 at 01:10 PM.
 September 22nd, 2019, 01:24 PM #2 Global Moderator   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 21,035 Thanks: 2271 Multiplying by (2x + 3)² (so that the multiplier is non-negative) gives (x - 1)(2x + 3) < (2x + 3)², which simplifies to 0 < (x + 4)(2x + 3). Hence x < -4 or x > -3/2, i.e. x ∈ (-∞, -4) ∪ (-3/2, +∞).
 September 22nd, 2019, 01:32 PM #3 Senior Member   Joined: Mar 2015 From: Universe 2.71828i3.14159 Posts: 132 Thanks: 49 Math Focus: Area of Circle (x-1)/(2x+3) < 1 1. Assume $x>-3/2$ $x-1<2x+3 \Rightarrow x>-4$ therefore x>-3/2 2. Assume x<-3/2 $x-1>2x+3 \Rightarrow x<-4$ therefore x<-4
 September 22nd, 2019, 01:41 PM #4 Senior Member   Joined: Jun 2019 From: USA Posts: 310 Thanks: 162 To explain it more simply, if you multiply (or divide) an inequality by a negative number, then the inequality sign changes direction. $x \leq 4 \rightarrow -x \geq -4$ Your method works iff (2x+3) is positive. If it is negative, then you have to flip the inequality. This is why the solution consists of two distinct regions. Thanks from PaoAndreCM

 Tags falacy, fallacy, inequation, solving

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post policer Algebra 15 December 30th, 2017 04:00 PM Vale Algebra 3 January 11th, 2014 04:25 AM Vale Trigonometry 3 January 7th, 2014 11:25 PM Aleks855 Algebra 3 May 6th, 2012 12:17 PM Aleks855 Calculus 1 December 31st, 1969 04:00 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top