Quadratic formula

A quadratic function with roots x = 1 and x = 4.

In elementary algebra, the quadratic

formula is the solution of the quadratic
equation. There are other ways to solve
the quadratic equation instead of using
the quadratic formula, such as factoring,
completing the square, or graphing.
Using the quadratic formula is often the
most convenient way.

The general quadratic equation is

Here x represents an unknown, while a, b,

and c are constants with a not equal to 0.
One can verify that the quadratic formula
satisfies the quadratic equation by
inserting the former into the latter. With
the above parameterization, the
quadratic formula is:
Each of the solutions given by the
quadratic formula is called a root of the
quadratic equation. Geometrically, these
roots represent the x values at which any
parabola, explicitly given as
y = ax2 + bx + c, crosses the x-axis. As
well as being a formula that will yield the
zeros of any parabola, the quadratic
formula will give the axis of symmetry of
the parabola, and it can be used to
immediately determine how many real
zeros the quadratic equation has.

Derivations of the formula

By using the 'completing the
square' method
The quadratic formula can be derived
with a simple application of technique of
completing the square.[1][2][3][4] The two
derivations are as follows:

Method 1

Divide the quadratic equation by a, which

is allowed because a is non-zero:

Subtract ac from both sides of the

equation, yielding:
The quadratic equation is now in a form
to which the method of completing the
square can be applied. Thus, add a
constant to both sides of the equation
such that the left hand side becomes a
complete square.

which produces:

Accordingly, after rearranging the terms

on the right hand side to have a common
denominator, we obtain:
The square has thus been completed.
Taking the square root of both sides
yields the following equation:

Isolating x gives the quadratic formula:

The plus-minus symbol "±" indicates that

both are solutions of the quadratic
equation.[5] There are many alternatives
of this derivation with minor differences,
mostly concerning the manipulation of a.

The quadratic formula may also be

written as:

which may be simplified to:

This version of the formula is convenient

when complex roots are accepted. Then
the expression outside the square root
will be the real part and the square root
expression will be the imaginary part.
The expression inside the square root is
a discriminant.

Some sources, particularly older ones,

use alternative parameterizations of the
quadratic equation such as
ax2 − 2bx + c = 0[6] or ax2 + 2bx + c = 0,[7]
where b has a magnitude one half of the
more common one. These result in
slightly different forms for the solution,
but are otherwise equivalent.

A lesser known quadratic formula, as

used in Muller's method, and which can
be found from Vieta's formulas, provides
the same roots via the equation:

Method 2

The majority of algebra texts published

over the last several decades teach
completing the square using the
sequence presented earlier: (1) divide
each side by a to make the equation
b 2
monic, (2) rearrange, (3) then add ( 2a )
to both sides to complete the square.

As pointed out by Larry Hoehn in 1975,

completing the square can be
accomplished by a different sequence
that leads to a simpler sequence of
intermediate terms: (1) multiply each
side by 4a, (2) rearrange, (3) then add
b2.[8]

In other words, the quadratic formula can

be derived as follows:
This actually represents an ancient
derivation of the quadratic formula and
was known to the Hindus at least as far
back as 1025.[9] Compared with the
derivation in standard usage, this
alternate derivation is shorter, involves
fewer computations with literal
coefficients, avoids fractions until the
last step, has simpler expressions, and
uses simpler mathematics. As Hoehn
states, "it is easier 'to add the square of
b' than it is 'to add the square of half the
coefficient of the x term'".[8]

Many alternative derivations of the

quadratic formula are in the literature.
These derivations may be simpler than
the standard completing the square
method and represent interesting
applications of other algebraic
techniques or may offer insight into other
areas of mathematics.

By substitution

Another technique is solution by

substitution.[10] In this technique, we
substitute x = y + m into the quadratic to
get:

Expanding the result and then collecting

the powers of y produces:
We have not yet imposed a second
condition on y and m, so we now choose
m so that the middle term vanishes. That
−b
is, 2am + b = 0 or m = 2a . Subtracting the
constant term from both sides of the
equation (to move it to the right hand
side) and then dividing by a gives:

Substituting for m gives:

Therefore,
 b provides
substituting x = y + m = y − 2a
the quadratic formula

By using algebraic identities

The following method was used by many

historical mathematicians:[11]

Let the roots of the standard quadratic

equation be r1 and r2. The derivation
starts by recalling the identity:
Taking the square root on both sides, we
get:

Since the coefficient a ≠ 0, we can divide

the standard equation by a to obtain a
quadratic polynomial having the same
roots. Namely,

From this we can see that the sum of the

roots of the standard quadratic equation
is given by − ab , and the product of those
roots is given by ac . Hence the identity
can be rewritten as:
Now,

Since r2 = −r1 − ab , if we take

then we obtain

and if we instead take

then we calculate that

Combining these results by using the

standard shorthand ±, we have that the
solutions of the quadratic equation are
given by:

By Lagrange resolvents

An alternative way of deriving the

quadratic formula is via the method of
Lagrange resolvents,[12] which is an early
part of Galois theory.[13] This method can
be generalized to give the roots of cubic
polynomials and quartic polynomials,
and leads to Galois theory, which allows
one to understand the solution of
algebraic equations of any degree in
terms of the symmetry group of their
roots, the Galois group.

This approach focuses on the roots more

than on rearranging the original equation.
Given a monic quadratic polynomial

assume that it factors as

Expanding yields

where p = −(α + β) and q = αβ.

Since the order of multiplication does not

matter, one can switch α and β and the
values of p and q will not change: one
can say that p and q are symmetric
polynomials in α and β. In fact, they are
the elementary symmetric polynomials –
any symmetric polynomial in α and β can
be expressed in terms of α + β and αβ
The Galois theory approach to analyzing
and solving polynomials is: given the
coefficients of a polynomial, which are
symmetric functions in the roots, can one
"break the symmetry" and recover the
roots? Thus solving a polynomial of
degree n is related to the ways of
rearranging ("permuting") n terms, which
is called the symmetric group on n
letters, and denoted Sn. For the quadratic
polynomial, the only way to rearrange two
terms is to swap them ("transpose"
them), and thus solving a quadratic
polynomial is simple.

To find the roots α and β, consider their

sum and difference:
These are called the Lagrange resolvents
of the polynomial; notice that one of
these depends on the order of the roots,
which is the key point. One can recover
the roots from the resolvents by inverting
the above equations:

Thus, solving for the resolvents gives the

original roots.

Now r1 = α + β is a symmetric function in

α and β, so it can be expressed in terms
of p and q, and in fact r1 = −p as noted
above. But r2 = α − β is not symmetric,
since switching α and β yields −r2 = β − α
(formally, this is termed a group action of
the symmetric group of the roots). Since
r2 is not symmetric, it cannot be
expressed in terms of the coefficients p
and q, as these are symmetric in the
roots and thus so is any polynomial
expression involving them. Changing the
order of the roots only changes r2 by a
factor of −1, and thus the square
r22 = (α − β)2 is symmetric in the roots,
and thus expressible in terms of p and q.
Using the equation

yields
and thus

If one takes the positive root, breaking

symmetry, one obtains:

and thus

Thus the roots are

which is the quadratic formula.
Substituting p = ab , q = ac yields the usual
form for when a quadratic is not monic.
The resolvents can be recognized as
r1 −p −b
2 = 2 = 2a being the vertex, and
r22 = p2 − 4q is the discriminant (of a
monic polynomial).

A similar but more complicated method

works for cubic equations, where one
has three resolvents and a quadratic
equation (the "resolving polynomial")
relating r2 and r3, which one can solve by
the quadratic equation, and similarly for a
quartic equation (degree 4), whose
resolving polynomial is a cubic, which
can in turn be solved.[12] The same
method for a quintic equation yields a
polynomial of degree 24, which does not
simplify the problem, and, in fact,
solutions to quintic equations in general
cannot be expressed using only roots.

By extrema

Knowing the value of x in the functional

extreme point makes it possible to solve
only for the increase (or decrease)
needed in x to solve the quadratic
equation. This method first uses
differentiation to find the x value at the
extremum, called xext. We then solve for
the value, q, that ensures that
f(xext + q) = 0. While this may not be the
most intuitive method, it ensures that the
mathematics is straightforward.

Setting the above differential to zero will

give us the extrema of the quadratic
function

We define q as follows:
Here x0 is the value of x that solves the
quadratic equation. The sum of xext and
the variable of interest, q, is plugged in to
the quadratic equation
The value of x in the extreme point is
then added to both sides of the equation
This gives the quadratic formula. This
way one avoids the technique of
completing the square and much more
complicated math is not needed. Note
this solution is very similar to solving
deriving the formula by substitution.

By splitting into real and

imaginary parts
Visualisation of the complex roots of
y = ax2 + bx + c: the parabola is rotated 180° about
its vertex (orange). Its x-intercepts are rotated 90°
around their mid-point, and the Cartesian plane is
interpreted as the complex plane (green).[14]

Consider the equation

where is a complex number

and where a, b, and c are real numbers.
Then
This splits into two equations, the real
part:

and the imaginary part:

Assuming that then divide the

second equation by y:

and solve for x:

Substitute this value for x into the first
equation and solve for y:

Since , then
Even though y was assumed to be non-
zero, this last formula works for any
roots of the original equation, whereas
assuming that turns out to be of
not much help (trivial and circular).

Historical development
The earliest methods for solving
quadratic equations were geometric.
Babylonian cuneiform tablets contain
problems reducible to solving quadratic
equations.[15] The Egyptian Berlin
Papyrus, dating back to the Middle
Kingdom (2050 BC to 1650 BC), contains
the solution to a two-term quadratic
equation.[16]

Euclid in Raphael Sanzio's School of Athens

The Greek mathematician Euclid (circa

300 BC) used geometric methods to
solve quadratic equations in Book 2 of
his Elements, an influential mathematical
treatise.[17] Rules for quadratic equations
appear in the Chinese The Nine Chapters
on the Mathematical Art circa 200
BC.[18][19] In his work Arithmetica, the
Greek mathematician Diophantus (circa
250 BC) solved quadratic equations with
a method more recognizably algebraic
than the geometric algebra of Euclid.[17]
His solution gives only one root, even
when both roots are positive.[20]

The Indian mathematician Brahmagupta

(597–668 AD) explicitly described the
quadratic formula in his treatise
Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta published in 628
AD,[21] but written in words instead of
symbols.[22] His solution of the quadratic
equation ax2 + bx = c was as follows: "To
the absolute number multiplied by four
times the [coefficient of the] square, add
the square of the [coefficient of the]
middle term; the square root of the same,
less the [coefficient of the] middle term,
being divided by twice the [coefficient of
the] square is the value."[23] This is
equivalent to:

The 9th-century Persian mathematician

Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī
solved quadratic equations
algebraically.[24] The quadratic formula
covering all cases was first obtained by
Simon Stevin in 1594.[25] In 1637 René
Descartes published La Géométrie
containing special cases of the quadratic
formula in the form we know today. The
first appearance of the general solution
in the modern mathematical literature
appeared in an 1896 paper by Henry
Heaton.[26]

Significant uses
Geometrical significance

2
Graph of y = ax2 + bx + c, where a and the
discriminant b2 − 4ac are positive, with
Roots and y-intercept in red
Vertex and axis of symmetry in blue
Focus and directrix in pink

In terms of coordinate geometry, a

parabola is a curve whose (x, y)-
coordinates are described by a second-
degree polynomial, i.e. any equation of
the form:

where p represents the polynomial of

degree 2 and a0, a1, and a2 ≠ 0 are
constant coefficients whose subscripts
correspond to their respective term's
degree. The geometrical interpretation of
the quadratic formula is that it defines
the points on the x-axis where the
parabola will cross the axis. Additionally,
if the quadratic formula was looked at as
two terms,

the axis of symmetry appears as the line

b √b2 − 4ac
x = − 2a . The other term, 2a , gives
the distance the zeros are away from the
axis of symmetry, where the plus sign
represents the distance to the right, and
the minus sign represents the distance to
the left.
If this distance term were to decrease to
zero, the value of the axis of symmetry
would be the x value of the only zero, that
is, there is only one possible solution to
the quadratic equation. Algebraically, this
means that √b2 − 4ac = 0, or simply
b2 − 4ac = 0 (where the left-hand side is
referred to as the discriminant). This is
one of three cases, where the
discriminant indicates how many zeros
the parabola will have. If the discriminant
is positive, the distance would be non-
zero, and there will be two solutions.
However, there is also the case where the
discriminant is less than zero, and this
indicates the distance will be imaginary –
or some multiple of the complex unit i,
where i = √−1 – and the parabola's zeros
will be complex numbers. The complex
roots will be complex conjugates, where
the real part of the complex roots will be
the value of the axis of symmetry. There
will be no real values of x where the
parabola crosses the x-axis.

Dimensional analysis

If the constants a, b, and/or c are not

unitless, then the units of x must be
equal to the units of ab , due to the
requirement that ax2 and bx agree on
their units. Furthermore, by the same
logic, the units of c must be equal to the
b2
units of a , which can be verified without
solving for x. This can be a powerful tool
for verifying that a quadratic expression
of physical quantities has been set up
correctly, prior to solving it.

See also
Discriminant
Fundamental theorem of algebra

References
1. Rich, Barnett; Schmidt, Philip (2004),
Schaum's Outline of Theory and
Problems of Elementary Algebra ,
The McGraw–Hill Companies,
ISBN 0-07-141083-X, Chapter 13
§4.4, p. 291
2. Li, Xuhui. An Investigation of
Secondary School Algebra Teachers'
Mathematical Knowledge for
Teaching Algebraic Equation Solving,
p. 56 (ProQuest, 2007): "The
quadratic formula is the most
general method for solving quadratic
equations and is derived from
another general method: completing
the square."
3. Rockswold, Gary. College algebra
and trigonometry and precalculus, p.
178 (Addison Wesley, 2002).
4. Beckenbach, Edwin et al. Modern
college algebra and trigonometry, p.
81 (Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1986).
5. Sterling, Mary Jane (2010), Algebra I
For Dummies , Wiley Publishing,
p. 219, ISBN 978-0-470-55964-2
6. Kahan, Willian (November 20, 2004),
On the Cost of Floating-Point
Computation Without Extra-Precise
Arithmetic (PDF), retrieved
2012-12-25
7. "Quadratic Formula" , Proof Wiki,
retrieved 2016-10-08
8. Hoehn, Larry (1975). "A More Elegant
Method of Deriving the Quadratic
Formula". The Mathematics Teacher.
68 (5): 442–443.
9. Smith, David E. (1958). History of
Mathematics, Vol. II. Dover
 Publications. p. 446.
ISBN 0486204308.
10. Joseph J. Rotman. (2010). Advanced
modern algebra (Vol. 114). American
Mathematical Soc. Section 1.1
11. Debnath, L. (2009). The legacy of
Leonhard Euler–a tricentennial
tribute. International Journal of
Mathematical Education in Science
and Technology, 40(3), 353–388.
Section 3.6
12. Clark, A. (1984). Elements of
abstract algebra. Courier
Corporation. p. 146.
13. Prasolov, Viktor; Solovyev, Yuri
(1997), Elliptic functions and elliptic
 integrals , AMS Bookstore, ISBN 978-
0-8218-0587-9, §6.2, p. 134
14. "Complex Roots Made Visible –
Math Fun Facts" . Retrieved
1 October 2016.
15. Irving, Ron (2013). Beyond the
Quadratic Formula . MAA. p. 34.
ISBN 978-0-88385-783-0.
16. The Cambridge Ancient History Part
2 Early History of the Middle East .
Cambridge University Press. 1971.
p. 530. ISBN 978-0-521-07791-0.
17. Irving, Ron (2013). Beyond the
Quadratic Formula . MAA. p. 39.
ISBN 978-0-88385-783-0.
18. Aitken, Wayne. "A Chinese Classic:
The Nine Chapters" (PDF).
Mathematics Department, California
State University. Retrieved 28 April
2013.
19. Smith, David Eugene (1958). History
of Mathematics . Courier Dover
Publications. p. 380. ISBN 978-0-
486-20430-7.
20. Smith, David Eugene (1958). History
of Mathematics . Courier Dover
Publications. p. 134. ISBN 0-486-
20429-4.
21. Bradley, Michael. The Birth of
Mathematics: Ancient Times to
 1300, p. 86 (Infobase Publishing
2006).
22. Mackenzie, Dana. The Universe in
Zero Words: The Story of
Mathematics as Told through
Equations, p. 61 (Princeton
University Press, 2012).
23. Stillwell, John (2004). Mathematics
and Its History (2nd ed.). Springer.
p. 87. ISBN 0-387-95336-1.
24. Irving, Ron (2013). Beyond the
Quadratic Formula . MAA. p. 42.
ISBN 978-0-88385-783-0.
25. Struik, D. J.; Stevin, Simon (1958),
The Principal Works of Simon Stevin,
 Mathematics (PDF), II–B, C. V.
Swets & Zeitlinger, p. 470
26. Heaton, H. (1896) A Method of
Solving Quadratic Equations ,
American Mathematical Monthly
3(10), 236–237.

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Quadratic_formula&oldid=898423983"

Last edited 14 days ago by Jackint…

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.