Why do we automatically assume that when we divide a polynomial by a second degree polynomial the remainder...











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












Given question:




If a polynomial leaves a remainder of 5 when divided by x − 3 and a remainder of −7 when divided by x + 1,
what is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by x^2 − 2x − 3?




Solution:




We observe that when we divide by a second degree polynomial the remainder will generally be linear. Thus
the division statement becomes
p(x) = (x^2 − 2x − 3)q(x) + ax + b




Can someone please explain at a PRE-CALCULUS level? Thanks










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 3




    Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
    – Théophile
    1 hour ago















up vote
6
down vote

favorite












Given question:




If a polynomial leaves a remainder of 5 when divided by x − 3 and a remainder of −7 when divided by x + 1,
what is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by x^2 − 2x − 3?




Solution:




We observe that when we divide by a second degree polynomial the remainder will generally be linear. Thus
the division statement becomes
p(x) = (x^2 − 2x − 3)q(x) + ax + b




Can someone please explain at a PRE-CALCULUS level? Thanks










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 3




    Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
    – Théophile
    1 hour ago













up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











Given question:




If a polynomial leaves a remainder of 5 when divided by x − 3 and a remainder of −7 when divided by x + 1,
what is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by x^2 − 2x − 3?




Solution:




We observe that when we divide by a second degree polynomial the remainder will generally be linear. Thus
the division statement becomes
p(x) = (x^2 − 2x − 3)q(x) + ax + b




Can someone please explain at a PRE-CALCULUS level? Thanks










share|cite|improve this question













Given question:




If a polynomial leaves a remainder of 5 when divided by x − 3 and a remainder of −7 when divided by x + 1,
what is the remainder when the polynomial is divided by x^2 − 2x − 3?




Solution:




We observe that when we divide by a second degree polynomial the remainder will generally be linear. Thus
the division statement becomes
p(x) = (x^2 − 2x − 3)q(x) + ax + b




Can someone please explain at a PRE-CALCULUS level? Thanks







algebra-precalculus functions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









Ke Ke

575




575








  • 3




    Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
    – Théophile
    1 hour ago














  • 3




    Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
    – Théophile
    1 hour ago








3




3




Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
– Théophile
1 hour ago




Compare to long division with whole numbers: if you divide by $10$, say, then the remainder will be less than $10$. Why? Because if not, then you stopped dividing too early.
– Théophile
1 hour ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
10
down vote



accepted










Because by definition the quotient and the remainder of the division of a polynomial $p_1(x)$ by a polynomial $p_2(x)$ are polynomials $q(x)$ (the quotient) and $r(x)$ (the remainder) such that





  1. $p_1(x)=p_2(x)q(x)+r(x)$;


  2. $r(x)=0$ or its degree is smaller than the degree of $p_2(x)$.


In particular, if $p_2(x)$ is quadratic, then the degree of $r(x)$ is at most $1$.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    4
    down vote













    While José Carlos Santos's answer is correct, I think it might be useful to talk about why $r(x)$ is defined to have degree less than $p_2(x)$. (J.G. explains this, but at a higher level than I suspect someone wanting "pre-calculus" would follow.)



    If the degree of $r(x)$ is the same size or greater than $p_2(x)$, then you can subtract off a multiple of $p_2(x)$ from $r(x)$ to get a new remainder of lower degree. I.e., we can continue the division process until $r(x)$ is of lower degree than $p_2(x)$. It is only then that we have to stop and call anything left over the remainder.



    For example, dividing $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$ by $x^2 + 1$ follows these steps:




    1. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is $frac {3x^3}{x^2} = 3x$

    2. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $3x$ and subtract the result ($3x^3 + 3x$) from $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$, leaving $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$. I.e.,$$3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 = (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x^2 - 2x - 5)$$

    3. Note that the ratio of the leading terms of the remainder and $x^2 + 1$ is $frac {-2x^2}{x^2} = -2$.

    4. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $-2$ and subtract the result ($-2x^2 - 2$) from $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$, leaving $-2x - 3$. I.e., $$-2x^2 - 2x - 5 = (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)$$

    5. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is now $frac {-2x}{x^2} = frac {-2}x$, which is not a polynomial, so we cannot continue.


    Combining the results from steps 2 and 4:
    $$begin{align}3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 &= (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)\&=(3x - 2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)end{align}$$



    If you stop at step 2, then $r(x)$ is indeed not linear. But at that stage, we could continue the division to get something smaller. It was only when the remainder was of lower degree that we had to stop.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      The point is we can prove as much. Let the quadratic be $q:=ax^2+bx+c$. Working moduli $q$, $x^2=-(bx+c)/a$. Each $x^n$ is then of the form $cx+d$ modulo $q$; you can prove this by induction (you can even get recursion relations on the coefficients). For example, $x^3=-(bx^2+cx)/a$, but we can turn replace $x^2$ as above.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        An explanation rather than a full proof. Trying to describe it more simply:



        Suppose your first polynomial is
        $$P=ax^4+bx^3+cx^2+d$$
        and you want to divide it by
        $$Q=ex^2+fx+g$$



        The first step is to multiply $Q$ by something which will turn its first term into $ax^4$. You've now got a polynomial which, when you subtract it from $P$, will make $ax^4$ disappear.



        Then you do the same again, except you arrange for the $x^3$ term to disappear.



        Now you have two quadratics: what's left of $P$, and $Q$.



        So, multiply $Q$ by a suitable constant to make the $x^2$ terms match, and subtract it. Now all that's left is a multiple of $x$ and a constant, since you've got rid of all the higher order terms—and that's your linear remainder.






        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',
          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%2f3036852%2fwhy-do-we-automatically-assume-that-when-we-divide-a-polynomial-by-a-second-degr%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes








          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          10
          down vote



          accepted










          Because by definition the quotient and the remainder of the division of a polynomial $p_1(x)$ by a polynomial $p_2(x)$ are polynomials $q(x)$ (the quotient) and $r(x)$ (the remainder) such that





          1. $p_1(x)=p_2(x)q(x)+r(x)$;


          2. $r(x)=0$ or its degree is smaller than the degree of $p_2(x)$.


          In particular, if $p_2(x)$ is quadratic, then the degree of $r(x)$ is at most $1$.






          share|cite|improve this answer

























            up vote
            10
            down vote



            accepted










            Because by definition the quotient and the remainder of the division of a polynomial $p_1(x)$ by a polynomial $p_2(x)$ are polynomials $q(x)$ (the quotient) and $r(x)$ (the remainder) such that





            1. $p_1(x)=p_2(x)q(x)+r(x)$;


            2. $r(x)=0$ or its degree is smaller than the degree of $p_2(x)$.


            In particular, if $p_2(x)$ is quadratic, then the degree of $r(x)$ is at most $1$.






            share|cite|improve this answer























              up vote
              10
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              10
              down vote



              accepted






              Because by definition the quotient and the remainder of the division of a polynomial $p_1(x)$ by a polynomial $p_2(x)$ are polynomials $q(x)$ (the quotient) and $r(x)$ (the remainder) such that





              1. $p_1(x)=p_2(x)q(x)+r(x)$;


              2. $r(x)=0$ or its degree is smaller than the degree of $p_2(x)$.


              In particular, if $p_2(x)$ is quadratic, then the degree of $r(x)$ is at most $1$.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              Because by definition the quotient and the remainder of the division of a polynomial $p_1(x)$ by a polynomial $p_2(x)$ are polynomials $q(x)$ (the quotient) and $r(x)$ (the remainder) such that





              1. $p_1(x)=p_2(x)q(x)+r(x)$;


              2. $r(x)=0$ or its degree is smaller than the degree of $p_2(x)$.


              In particular, if $p_2(x)$ is quadratic, then the degree of $r(x)$ is at most $1$.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered 4 hours ago









              José Carlos Santos

              146k22115215




              146k22115215






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  While José Carlos Santos's answer is correct, I think it might be useful to talk about why $r(x)$ is defined to have degree less than $p_2(x)$. (J.G. explains this, but at a higher level than I suspect someone wanting "pre-calculus" would follow.)



                  If the degree of $r(x)$ is the same size or greater than $p_2(x)$, then you can subtract off a multiple of $p_2(x)$ from $r(x)$ to get a new remainder of lower degree. I.e., we can continue the division process until $r(x)$ is of lower degree than $p_2(x)$. It is only then that we have to stop and call anything left over the remainder.



                  For example, dividing $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$ by $x^2 + 1$ follows these steps:




                  1. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is $frac {3x^3}{x^2} = 3x$

                  2. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $3x$ and subtract the result ($3x^3 + 3x$) from $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$, leaving $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$. I.e.,$$3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 = (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x^2 - 2x - 5)$$

                  3. Note that the ratio of the leading terms of the remainder and $x^2 + 1$ is $frac {-2x^2}{x^2} = -2$.

                  4. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $-2$ and subtract the result ($-2x^2 - 2$) from $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$, leaving $-2x - 3$. I.e., $$-2x^2 - 2x - 5 = (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)$$

                  5. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is now $frac {-2x}{x^2} = frac {-2}x$, which is not a polynomial, so we cannot continue.


                  Combining the results from steps 2 and 4:
                  $$begin{align}3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 &= (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)\&=(3x - 2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)end{align}$$



                  If you stop at step 2, then $r(x)$ is indeed not linear. But at that stage, we could continue the division to get something smaller. It was only when the remainder was of lower degree that we had to stop.






                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote













                    While José Carlos Santos's answer is correct, I think it might be useful to talk about why $r(x)$ is defined to have degree less than $p_2(x)$. (J.G. explains this, but at a higher level than I suspect someone wanting "pre-calculus" would follow.)



                    If the degree of $r(x)$ is the same size or greater than $p_2(x)$, then you can subtract off a multiple of $p_2(x)$ from $r(x)$ to get a new remainder of lower degree. I.e., we can continue the division process until $r(x)$ is of lower degree than $p_2(x)$. It is only then that we have to stop and call anything left over the remainder.



                    For example, dividing $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$ by $x^2 + 1$ follows these steps:




                    1. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is $frac {3x^3}{x^2} = 3x$

                    2. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $3x$ and subtract the result ($3x^3 + 3x$) from $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$, leaving $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$. I.e.,$$3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 = (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x^2 - 2x - 5)$$

                    3. Note that the ratio of the leading terms of the remainder and $x^2 + 1$ is $frac {-2x^2}{x^2} = -2$.

                    4. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $-2$ and subtract the result ($-2x^2 - 2$) from $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$, leaving $-2x - 3$. I.e., $$-2x^2 - 2x - 5 = (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)$$

                    5. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is now $frac {-2x}{x^2} = frac {-2}x$, which is not a polynomial, so we cannot continue.


                    Combining the results from steps 2 and 4:
                    $$begin{align}3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 &= (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)\&=(3x - 2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)end{align}$$



                    If you stop at step 2, then $r(x)$ is indeed not linear. But at that stage, we could continue the division to get something smaller. It was only when the remainder was of lower degree that we had to stop.






                    share|cite|improve this answer























                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote









                      While José Carlos Santos's answer is correct, I think it might be useful to talk about why $r(x)$ is defined to have degree less than $p_2(x)$. (J.G. explains this, but at a higher level than I suspect someone wanting "pre-calculus" would follow.)



                      If the degree of $r(x)$ is the same size or greater than $p_2(x)$, then you can subtract off a multiple of $p_2(x)$ from $r(x)$ to get a new remainder of lower degree. I.e., we can continue the division process until $r(x)$ is of lower degree than $p_2(x)$. It is only then that we have to stop and call anything left over the remainder.



                      For example, dividing $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$ by $x^2 + 1$ follows these steps:




                      1. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is $frac {3x^3}{x^2} = 3x$

                      2. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $3x$ and subtract the result ($3x^3 + 3x$) from $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$, leaving $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$. I.e.,$$3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 = (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x^2 - 2x - 5)$$

                      3. Note that the ratio of the leading terms of the remainder and $x^2 + 1$ is $frac {-2x^2}{x^2} = -2$.

                      4. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $-2$ and subtract the result ($-2x^2 - 2$) from $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$, leaving $-2x - 3$. I.e., $$-2x^2 - 2x - 5 = (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)$$

                      5. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is now $frac {-2x}{x^2} = frac {-2}x$, which is not a polynomial, so we cannot continue.


                      Combining the results from steps 2 and 4:
                      $$begin{align}3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 &= (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)\&=(3x - 2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)end{align}$$



                      If you stop at step 2, then $r(x)$ is indeed not linear. But at that stage, we could continue the division to get something smaller. It was only when the remainder was of lower degree that we had to stop.






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      While José Carlos Santos's answer is correct, I think it might be useful to talk about why $r(x)$ is defined to have degree less than $p_2(x)$. (J.G. explains this, but at a higher level than I suspect someone wanting "pre-calculus" would follow.)



                      If the degree of $r(x)$ is the same size or greater than $p_2(x)$, then you can subtract off a multiple of $p_2(x)$ from $r(x)$ to get a new remainder of lower degree. I.e., we can continue the division process until $r(x)$ is of lower degree than $p_2(x)$. It is only then that we have to stop and call anything left over the remainder.



                      For example, dividing $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$ by $x^2 + 1$ follows these steps:




                      1. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is $frac {3x^3}{x^2} = 3x$

                      2. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $3x$ and subtract the result ($3x^3 + 3x$) from $3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5$, leaving $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$. I.e.,$$3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 = (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x^2 - 2x - 5)$$

                      3. Note that the ratio of the leading terms of the remainder and $x^2 + 1$ is $frac {-2x^2}{x^2} = -2$.

                      4. Multiply $x^2 + 1$ by $-2$ and subtract the result ($-2x^2 - 2$) from $-2x^2 - 2x - 5$, leaving $-2x - 3$. I.e., $$-2x^2 - 2x - 5 = (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)$$

                      5. Note that the ratio of the leading terms is now $frac {-2x}{x^2} = frac {-2}x$, which is not a polynomial, so we cannot continue.


                      Combining the results from steps 2 and 4:
                      $$begin{align}3x^3 - 2x^2 + x - 5 &= (3x)(x^2 + 1) + (-2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)\&=(3x - 2)(x^2 + 1) + (-2x-3)end{align}$$



                      If you stop at step 2, then $r(x)$ is indeed not linear. But at that stage, we could continue the division to get something smaller. It was only when the remainder was of lower degree that we had to stop.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered 2 hours ago









                      Paul Sinclair

                      19k21440




                      19k21440






















                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote













                          The point is we can prove as much. Let the quadratic be $q:=ax^2+bx+c$. Working moduli $q$, $x^2=-(bx+c)/a$. Each $x^n$ is then of the form $cx+d$ modulo $q$; you can prove this by induction (you can even get recursion relations on the coefficients). For example, $x^3=-(bx^2+cx)/a$, but we can turn replace $x^2$ as above.






                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote













                            The point is we can prove as much. Let the quadratic be $q:=ax^2+bx+c$. Working moduli $q$, $x^2=-(bx+c)/a$. Each $x^n$ is then of the form $cx+d$ modulo $q$; you can prove this by induction (you can even get recursion relations on the coefficients). For example, $x^3=-(bx^2+cx)/a$, but we can turn replace $x^2$ as above.






                            share|cite|improve this answer























                              up vote
                              2
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              2
                              down vote









                              The point is we can prove as much. Let the quadratic be $q:=ax^2+bx+c$. Working moduli $q$, $x^2=-(bx+c)/a$. Each $x^n$ is then of the form $cx+d$ modulo $q$; you can prove this by induction (you can even get recursion relations on the coefficients). For example, $x^3=-(bx^2+cx)/a$, but we can turn replace $x^2$ as above.






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              The point is we can prove as much. Let the quadratic be $q:=ax^2+bx+c$. Working moduli $q$, $x^2=-(bx+c)/a$. Each $x^n$ is then of the form $cx+d$ modulo $q$; you can prove this by induction (you can even get recursion relations on the coefficients). For example, $x^3=-(bx^2+cx)/a$, but we can turn replace $x^2$ as above.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered 4 hours ago









                              J.G.

                              20.9k21933




                              20.9k21933






















                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  An explanation rather than a full proof. Trying to describe it more simply:



                                  Suppose your first polynomial is
                                  $$P=ax^4+bx^3+cx^2+d$$
                                  and you want to divide it by
                                  $$Q=ex^2+fx+g$$



                                  The first step is to multiply $Q$ by something which will turn its first term into $ax^4$. You've now got a polynomial which, when you subtract it from $P$, will make $ax^4$ disappear.



                                  Then you do the same again, except you arrange for the $x^3$ term to disappear.



                                  Now you have two quadratics: what's left of $P$, and $Q$.



                                  So, multiply $Q$ by a suitable constant to make the $x^2$ terms match, and subtract it. Now all that's left is a multiple of $x$ and a constant, since you've got rid of all the higher order terms—and that's your linear remainder.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    An explanation rather than a full proof. Trying to describe it more simply:



                                    Suppose your first polynomial is
                                    $$P=ax^4+bx^3+cx^2+d$$
                                    and you want to divide it by
                                    $$Q=ex^2+fx+g$$



                                    The first step is to multiply $Q$ by something which will turn its first term into $ax^4$. You've now got a polynomial which, when you subtract it from $P$, will make $ax^4$ disappear.



                                    Then you do the same again, except you arrange for the $x^3$ term to disappear.



                                    Now you have two quadratics: what's left of $P$, and $Q$.



                                    So, multiply $Q$ by a suitable constant to make the $x^2$ terms match, and subtract it. Now all that's left is a multiple of $x$ and a constant, since you've got rid of all the higher order terms—and that's your linear remainder.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer























                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote









                                      An explanation rather than a full proof. Trying to describe it more simply:



                                      Suppose your first polynomial is
                                      $$P=ax^4+bx^3+cx^2+d$$
                                      and you want to divide it by
                                      $$Q=ex^2+fx+g$$



                                      The first step is to multiply $Q$ by something which will turn its first term into $ax^4$. You've now got a polynomial which, when you subtract it from $P$, will make $ax^4$ disappear.



                                      Then you do the same again, except you arrange for the $x^3$ term to disappear.



                                      Now you have two quadratics: what's left of $P$, and $Q$.



                                      So, multiply $Q$ by a suitable constant to make the $x^2$ terms match, and subtract it. Now all that's left is a multiple of $x$ and a constant, since you've got rid of all the higher order terms—and that's your linear remainder.






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      An explanation rather than a full proof. Trying to describe it more simply:



                                      Suppose your first polynomial is
                                      $$P=ax^4+bx^3+cx^2+d$$
                                      and you want to divide it by
                                      $$Q=ex^2+fx+g$$



                                      The first step is to multiply $Q$ by something which will turn its first term into $ax^4$. You've now got a polynomial which, when you subtract it from $P$, will make $ax^4$ disappear.



                                      Then you do the same again, except you arrange for the $x^3$ term to disappear.



                                      Now you have two quadratics: what's left of $P$, and $Q$.



                                      So, multiply $Q$ by a suitable constant to make the $x^2$ terms match, and subtract it. Now all that's left is a multiple of $x$ and a constant, since you've got rid of all the higher order terms—and that's your linear remainder.







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered 10 mins ago









                                      timtfj

                                      686215




                                      686215






























                                          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%2f3036852%2fwhy-do-we-automatically-assume-that-when-we-divide-a-polynomial-by-a-second-degr%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

                                          Trompette piccolo

                                          Slow SSRS Report in dynamic grouping and multiple parameters

                                          Simon Yates (cyclisme)