0

image the question is to analyze $f(x)$ for monotonicity. I know I need to use D[f[x], x] and check if it is less than or greater to zero, but NSolve is not working properly.

f[x_] := 
  Sqrt[1 - a + (b + c) (c + b x + c x) - 
    Sqrt[(b + 2 c + a c)^2 - (b^2 - c^2)(3 + 4 a - a^2 + b^2 - c^2) x + 
      (b^2 - c^2) x^2]] + 
  Sqrt[1 - a + (b + c) (c + b x + c x) + 
    Sqrt[(b + 2 c + a c)^2 - (b^2 - c^2) (3 + 4 a - a^2 + b^2 - c^2) x + 
     (b^2 - c^2) x^2]] + 
  Sqrt[1 + a - (b - c) (c - b x - c x) - 
    Sqrt[(b - 2 c - a c)^2 - (b^2 - c^2) (3 - 4 a - a^2 + b^2 - c^2) x + 
      (b^2 - c^2) x^2]] + 
  Sqrt[1 + a - (b - c) (c - b x - c x) + 
    Sqrt[(b - 2 c - a c)^2 - (b^2 - c^2) (3 - 4 a - a^2 + b^2 - c^2) x + 
      (b^2 - c^2) x^2]]

Reduce[
  0 <= (1/4) (1 - a - b - c) <= 1 &&
  0 <= (1/4) (1 + a + b - c) <= 1 &&
  0 <= (1/4) (1 + a - b + c) <= 1 &&
  0 <= (1/4) (1 - a + b + c) <= 1 &&
  a^2 < b^2 < c^2, 
  {a, b, c}, Reals];

NSolve[D[f[x], x] > 0]

I did try to do this im many ways. I'm pretty new to Mathematica and today I thought of doing it this way, but it's not working

emonhossain
  • 105
  • 5
k_z
  • 11
  • 1
  • 3
  • Post mathematica code for your function, not an image. 2. Show the code you have put together so far.
  • – MarcoB May 31 '16 at 16:09
  • im pretty new so im just learning sory for all my bads is it properly posted now ? – k_z May 31 '16 at 16:16
  • 1
    Much better. Now consider that in Mathematica bx indicates a single variable called $bx$, not the product b*x as you wanted. To indicate the product, add a space in your code between $b$ and $x$: b x, or use an explicit multiplication sign (*). Also, you have some special character [Minus] in your Reduce expression: replace it with a "normal" minus sign, i.e. a hyphen on the keyboard. When you make those changes, your Reduce expression will return a result. Solve or NSolve, however, will really struggle to solve your equation symbolically. – MarcoB May 31 '16 at 16:35
  • is there anyway i can speed up the proces? like stop using numerial methods or something ? – k_z May 31 '16 at 16:56
  • k_z numerical methods are actually almost invariably MUCH faster than symbolic computation. That's the problem here actually: you should look into numerical methods instead! But before you move any further, please attempt to clarify your question as much as you can. – MarcoB May 31 '16 at 17:16
  • I need to check when its increasing or decreasing and when (for example x^2 is decreasing from minus infinity to 0 and increasing from 0 to infiity).I need to do this for 0<=x<=1, but apparently this question is from qauntum informatics field so im not sure if there is sombody who can help me . – k_z May 31 '16 at 17:25
  • You still have basic error in code: ac should be a c in several places. – murray May 31 '16 at 18:58
  • 1
    What does the Reduce expression have to do with the rest of the code? (Note that the trailing semicolon returns null output from the Reduce expression!) Are the conditions there meant to represent constraints upon the parameters a, b, and c? – murray May 31 '16 at 19:00
  • yes. this 5 ineqautions are coditions that are meant to represent it u are correct. as i told english is not my native and im new to mathematica and i did try to do "something" with reduce since all my previous attempts failed. – k_z May 31 '16 at 21:54
  • If ANYONE have idea how should i write the code and can explain my why it work this way I would be rly glad and in debt. Why for example FullSimplify[D[f[x], x]] is running forever and D[f[x],x] work rly fast. – k_z May 31 '16 at 22:02
  • The FullSimplify is trying to simplify your expression. It involves square roots of square roots, so you might guess it is not trivial to find simplifications. Moreover, you do not specify Assumptions on a,b,c,x so that Mathematica assumes they are complex - which in turn might prevent the simplification routines from finding solutions. D[f[x],x is just a straightforward derivative, without any further simplification applied - hence very fast. – Lukas Jun 01 '16 at 10:29