satellite73
  • satellite73
@amistre64 please refresh my feeble memory snap way to find polynomial through (-2,4),(0,-6),(4,70)
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
amistre64
  • amistre64
hmm, my method is to construct it such that each x value causes the unknown constants to zero out
anonymous
  • anonymous
i thought i had this, but i resorted to a two by two system then i tried writing \[4-5(x+2)+4x(x+2)\] which worked but it was agony finding those constants i though you had a snap way of finding them
amistre64
  • amistre64
if you can do a matrix augment, thats pretty snappy

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
yeah but i wanted the snappy method you used
Hero
  • Hero
....also interested in "snappy" method :D
amistre64
  • amistre64
i believe the method you posted is what i used at first (-2,4),(0,-6),(4,70) y = a + bx + cx(x+2) ; (0,-6) -6 = a +0+0 y = -6 + bx + cx(x+2) ; (-2,4) 10 = -2b + 0 ; b=-5 y = -6 -5x + cx(x+2) ; (4,70) 70+6+20 = c4(4+2) 96/24 = c = 4 y = -6 -5x + 4x(x+2)
anonymous
  • anonymous
Expanding this should work as well
1 Attachment
amistre64
  • amistre64
if there was another method that was snappier; you might have to refresh me memory how it looked to you
amistre64
  • amistre64
joes looks kinda legendre to me
Hero
  • Hero
@joemath314159, your method looks like some numerical methods stuff
anonymous
  • anonymous
no that was what i was looking for i guess that is what i did, somehow it looked easier when you did it. i guess the grass is always greener hello @Hero hello @joemath314159
anonymous
  • anonymous
It is legendre, learned it in Linear Algebra
amistre64
  • amistre64
its these lighntning fast clickers of mine, just makes it appear rico y suave lol
anonymous
  • anonymous
(0,-2) (1,1) (2,6) (3,19)
Hero
  • Hero
@satellite73, are you taking a course?
anonymous
  • anonymous
yes, at the school of amistre
Hero
  • Hero
lol
anonymous
  • anonymous
\[a+bx+cx(x-1)+cx(x-1)(x-2)+dx(x-1)(x-2)\] actually i think this is slightly different then legrange, but maybe it is identical
amistre64
  • amistre64
(0,-2) (1,1) (2,6) (3,19) y = -2 + bx +cx(x-1) + dx(x-1)(x-2) 1 = -2 + b; b= 3 y = -2 + 3x +cx(x-1) + dx(x-1)(x-2) 6 = -2 +6 + 2c ; c=1 y = -2 + 3x +x(x-1) + dx(x-1)(x-2) 19 = -2 + 9 + 6 + d(2); d=3 y = -2 + 3x +x(x-1) + 3x(x-1)(x-2) if i mathed it right
amistre64
  • amistre64
legendre i believe zeros out each constant term and omits one zero so that just a single constant is exposed at any time. Newtons method is similar to mine in that new information can be added as needed without have to reconstruct the whole equation
anonymous
  • anonymous
yeah legendre looks like what @joemath314159 wrote newtons i am not sure about
anonymous
  • anonymous
now i can sleep better. thanks!
amistre64
  • amistre64
http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR/mathematics-2/node109.html

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.