1. Further Pure Mathematics 1
- Syllabus
- 9231–2028–2029
- Section
- 1
- Level
- AS
For $A x^4+B x^3+C x^2+D x+E=0$ with roots $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta$:\sum \alpha=-\frac{B}{A},\qquad \sum_{i<j}\alpha_i\alpha_j=\frac{C}{A},\qquad \sum_{i<j<k}\alpha_i\alpha_j\alpha_k=-\frac{D}{A},\qquad \alpha\beta\gamma\delta=\frac{E}{A}.Thesamealternatingpatterntruncatesfordegrees2and3.
These are Vieta's relations: expand A(x−α)(x−β)⋯ and match coefficients. Each sigma means all distinct combinations of that size, not one selected pair or triple. Put the equation in descending powers first and divide every relation by the leading coefficient A.
If $e_1=\sum\alpha$, $e_2=\sum_{i<j}\alpha_i\alpha_j$ and $e_3=\sum_{i<j<k}\alpha_i\alpha_j\alpha_k$, then\sum\alpha^2=e_1^2-2e_2,\qquad \sum\alpha^3=e_1^3-3e_1e_2+3e_3.
For 2x3−5x2−4x+3=0, e1=5/2, e2=−2 and e3=−3/2. Hence ∑α2=(5/2)2−2(−2)=41/4. This obtains the symmetric value without solving the cubic; the same relations can instead form equations for unknown coefficients.
Do not lose the alternating signs: for a monic polynomial the coefficient pattern is 1,−e1,+e2,−e3,+e4. The syllabus restricts direct coefficient-root work here to equations of degree 2, 3 or 4.
For original roots x=α and required new roots y=g(α): (1) rearrange to express x in terms of y; (2) substitute that expression for x in f(x)=0; (3) clear denominators or eliminate radicals; (4) collect into a polynomial in y and make the leading coefficient convenient; (5) check its degree and that each required transformed root satisfies it.
For reciprocal roots $y=1/x$, substitute $x=1/y$. Iff(x)=2x^3-3x^2+5x-7,theny^3f(1/y)=2-3y+5y^2-7y^3=0,soanequationforthereciprocalrootsis7y^3-5y^2+3y-2=0.
For a linear change y=mx+c with m=0, use x=(y−c)/m. For example, if x2−3x+2=0 and y=2x−1, substituting x=(y+1)/2 and multiplying by 4 gives (y+1)2−6(y+1)+8=0, hence y2−4y+3=0. Its roots 1,3 are exactly 2(1)−1,2(2)−1.
For powers such as y=x2 or x3, substitution may introduce y or 3y. Isolate the radical expression, raise to the necessary power, and simplify. Because raising powers can introduce extra solutions, verify the final roots against the original transformation and preserve the expected number of transformed roots, including multiplicity.
Transform roots, not coefficients. Multiplying the final equation by any non-zero constant changes no roots, but multiplying by a variable expression or clearing a denominator carelessly can add the forbidden value where that denominator was zero.
For y=P(x)/Q(x) with numerator and denominator degrees at most 2: factor first; record excluded x-values and cancelled-factor holes; find axis intercepts; divide P by Q; locate vertical and end-behaviour asymptotes; use y′ or the discriminant range calculation for turning values; then use signs and limits on each interval to join the features with the correct branches.
After cancellation, $Q(a)=0$ gives a vertical asymptote $x=a$ when the numerator is non-zero there. If $\deg P=\deg Q$, the horizontal asymptote is the ratio of leading coefficients. If $\deg P=\deg Q+1$, division gives\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}=m x+c+\frac{R(x)}{Q(x)},so $y=m x+c$ is the oblique asymptote.
To find the range, treat y as a fixed candidate and rearrange yQ(x)=P(x) into a quadratic in x. A y-value occurs exactly when this equation has an allowed real x, so require discriminant Δ≥0 and then remove values produced only by an excluded x. Equality Δ=0 usually identifies a turning value.
Fory=\frac{x^2-2x+3}{x^2+1},thedenominatorisalwayspositiveand(y-1)x^2+2x+(y-3)=0.Hence\Delta=4-4(y-1)(y-3)\ge0\iff y^2-4y+2\le0,sotherangeis2-\sqrt2\le y\le2+\sqrt2.The horizontal asymptote $y=1$ is crossed at $x=1$; an asymptote is limiting behaviour, not automatically a forbidden y-value.
A cancelled denominator factor makes a hole, not a vertical asymptote. A feature-complete sketch must show significant intercepts, turning points and asymptotes; detailed point plotting is neither required nor a substitute for those deductions.
| Required graph | Construction from y=f(x) | Features to track |
|---|---|---|
| y2=f(x) | Keep only where f(x)≥0; replace each (x,f(x)) by (x,±f(x)) | Symmetric about x-axis; branches meet at zeros of f |
| y=1/f(x) | Replace each defined non-zero output y by 1/y | Same sign as f; zeros of f become vertical asymptotes; f→±∞ gives reciprocal output tending to 0 |
| y=∣f(x)∣ | Keep positive parts; reflect every negative part in the x-axis | Same domain and zeros; a simple crossing usually becomes a sharp minimum |
| y=f(∣x∣) | Keep the original half for x≥0 and reflect it in the y-axis; discard the original x<0 half | Always even; the right-hand domain/features determine both sides |
∣f(x)∣ changes the output, so it folds below-axis pieces upward. f(∣x∣) changes the input, so it copies the right-hand half to the left. For y2=f(x), negative f-values produce no real points; for 1/f(x), points where the original graph is undefined remain outside the domain even if the reciprocal limit is 0.
Use the transformed sketch to solve: an equation asks for x-coordinates of intersections with the relevant horizontal or comparison curve; an inequality asks for x-intervals where one graph lies above/below another. Mark critical x-values first, test strict versus inclusive endpoints, and exclude every undefined input.
These are not the generic translations f(x−a) or f(x)+a. Preserve the exact operation shown: squaring y, reciprocating the output, taking the output modulus and taking the input modulus produce four different domains and symmetries.
\sum_{r=1}^{n}r=\frac{n(n+1)}2,\qquad \sum_{r=1}^{n}r^2=\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}6,\qquad \sum_{r=1}^{n}r^3=\left[\frac{n(n+1)}2\right]^2.
Expand and collect the general term as ar3+br2+cr+d. Use sigma linearity, replace each power sum by its standard result, and remember ∑r=1nd=dn. Factor or simplify only after all four contributions are present.
\sum_{r=1}^{n}(2r-3)(r+4)=\sum_{r=1}^{n}(2r^2+5r-12)=\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}3+\frac{5n(n+1)}2-12n=\frac{n(4n^2+21n-55)}6.
If the lower limit is not 1, adjust it explicitly: for example, ∑r=3ng(r)=∑r=1ng(r)−g(1)−g(2). If the upper limit is a number, substitute it only after obtaining the correct finite formula.
The required standard results are for r, r2 and r3, not the geometric-series formula. Never square or cube ∑r to obtain ∑r2 or ∑r3; only the displayed identities are valid.
Rewrite the general term as ur−ur+k (or the reverse), often by partial fractions. Write at least the first k+1 terms and the last k+1 terms. Cancel identical interior terms with their signs visible. What remains is determined by the initial and final boundaries, not by a guessed pattern.
\frac1{(r+1)(r+3)}=\frac12\left(\frac1{r+1}-\frac1{r+3}\right).
\sum_{r=1}^{n}\frac1{(r+1)(r+3)}=\frac12\left(\frac12+\frac13-\frac1{n+2}-\frac1{n+3}\right).Theshiftis2,sotwoinitialandtwofinalfractionssurvive.
Check the formula at n=1: the right side must equal 1/(2⋅4)=1/8. This catches an incorrect final index or a missing boundary term. If a denominator is zero at an index, the original sum is undefined there; do not telescope across that index.
Cancellation happens only between equal terms with opposite signs after the sum is expanded. A lag-one example leaves one term at each end, but a lag-k difference generally leaves k terms at each end.
For $S_n=\sum_{r=1}^{n}a_r$, the infinite series converges to $L$ exactly when\lim_{n\to\infty}S_n=Lexists and is finite. Then $\sum_{r=1}^{\infty}a_r=L$.
FromthefiniteresultS_n=\frac12\left(\frac12+\frac13-\frac1{n+2}-\frac1{n+3}\right),bothfinalfractionstendto0,so\sum_{r=1}^{\infty}\frac1{(r+1)(r+3)}=\frac12\left(\frac12+\frac13\right)=\frac5{12}.
If Sn contains a parameter power such as xn, first find the values of x for which every n-dependent part has a limit. Usually xn→0 for ∣x∣<1; test x=1 and x=−1 separately in the exact Sn, because a cancellation may make an endpoint converge even when the generic rule does not.
Convergence forces an=Sn−Sn−1→0, but an→0 alone does not prove that Sn settles. The required argument here is direct: derive Sn, take its limit, state the parameter conditions, and only then give the sum to infinity.
| Operation | Condition | Result |
|---|---|---|
| A±B | A and B have the same dimensions | Add/subtract corresponding entries; same dimensions |
| AB | columns of A = rows of B | If A is m×n and B is n×p, AB is m×p |
| AO or OA | dimensions make the product valid | Zero matrix of the resulting dimensions |
| AI or IA | I has the matching square order | A |
Entry (i,j) of AB is row i of A dotted with column j of B. This rule works for non-square matrices and is not entry-by-entry multiplication. AB may exist when BA does not; if both exist, they need not be equal.
A=\begin{pmatrix}1&2&0\-1&3&1\end{pmatrix},\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}2&1\0&-2\4&3\end{pmatrix}AB=\begin{pmatrix}1(2)+2(0)+0(4)&1(1)+2(-2)+0(3)\-1(2)+3(0)+1(4)&-1(1)+3(-2)+1(3)\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}2&-3\2&-4\end{pmatrix}.
The zero matrix is shape-specific, while the identity matrix is square. Always write dimensions before multiplying; matching the visible number of entries is not enough.
A square matrix M is non-singular exactly when detM=0; then one unique inverse satisfies MM−1=M−1M=I. If detM=0, M is singular and no inverse exists.
ForM=\begin{pmatrix}a&b\c&d\end{pmatrix},\qquad \det M=ad-bc,and, when $ad-bc\ne0$,M^{-1}=\frac1{ad-bc}\begin{pmatrix}d&-b\-c&a\end{pmatrix}.
For a 3×3 matrix, evaluate the determinant by a signed cofactor expansion. Find the inverse either by M−1=adj(M)/detM (cofactor matrix, then transpose) or by row-reducing [M∣I] to [I∣M−1]. Finish by multiplying back to I.
ForM=\begin{pmatrix}1&1&0\0&1&1\0&0&2\end{pmatrix},\quad \det M=2,soMisnon−singular.RowreductiongivesM^{-1}=\begin{pmatrix}1&-1&1/2\0&1&-1/2\0&0&1/2\end{pmatrix},and direct multiplication gives $MM^{-1}=I$.
Do not take reciprocals entry by entry. A negative determinant still permits an inverse; only zero makes the matrix singular.
Fornon−singularAandB,(AB)^{-1}=B^{-1}A^{-1},because(AB)(B^{-1}A^{-1})=A(BB^{-1})A^{-1}=I.Moregenerally,(A_1A_2\cdots A_k)^{-1}=A_k^{-1}\cdots A_2^{-1}A_1^{-1}.
A product applies the rightmost action first. Its inverse must undo the last applied action first, so every factor and the whole order reverse. This is not a commutativity shortcut; associativity lets the neighbouring inverse pairs cancel.
LetA=\begin{pmatrix}1&2\0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}3&0\0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad AB=\begin{pmatrix}3&2\0&1\end{pmatrix}. ThenB^{-1}A^{-1}=\begin{pmatrix}1/3&0\0&1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}1&-2\0&1\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1/3&-2/3\0&1\end{pmatrix}=(AB)^{-1}.
The rule requires square non-singular factors. Do not write A−1B−1 unless that product independently happens to equal the correct reverse-order result.
For column vectors, the columns of a 2×2 matrix M are the images of (1,0)T and (0,1)T. This gives a direct way to build or identify the transformation, including unfamiliar linear transformations.
| Transformation about the origin | Matrix |
|---|---|
| Rotation anticlockwise by θ | (cosθsinθ−sinθcosθ) |
| Reflection in x-axis / line y=x | (100−1) / (0110) |
| Enlargement factor k | kI |
| Stretch parallel to x-axis, factor k | (k001) |
| Shear x′=x+ky | (10k1) |
If B acts first and A second, the composite matrix is AB. For a stretch parallel to the x-axis by 3 followed by reflection in $y=x$,A=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\1&0\end{pmatrix},\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}3&0\0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad AB=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\3&0\end{pmatrix}.
If M is non-singular, M−1 represents the inverse transformation. The area scale factor is ∣detM∣; a negative determinant records orientation reversal, not negative area. A zero determinant collapses area and has no inverse transformation.
Products act right-to-left on column vectors: AB means B then A. A stretch is directional, whereas an enlargement scales every direction equally.
| Object | Meaning under M | Equation |
|---|---|---|
| Invariant (fixed) point v | The point itself does not move | Mv=v, so (M−I)v=0 |
| Invariant line | Every point of the line maps somewhere on the same line | For a line through the origin, its direction v satisfies Mv=λv for some scalar λ |
| Line of invariant points | Every point on the line is fixed | Mv=v for every direction/point on it, so the relevant eigenvalue is 1 |
Every linear matrix transformation fixes the origin. Non-zero fixed points exist only when M−I is singular. Solve the simultaneous equations from (M−I)(x,y)T=0 and describe the full set, which may be just the origin or an entire line of fixed points.
For $M=\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{pmatrix}$ and a candidate line $y=mx$, the direction $(1,m)^T$ maps to $(a+bm,c+dm)^T$. Invariance requires parallel directions:c+dm=m(a+bm). Also check a vertical line separately using direction $(0,1)^T$.
ForM=\begin{pmatrix}4&-1\2&1\end{pmatrix},2+m=m(4-m)\iff m^2-3m+2=0,so $m=1$ or $m=2$. Thus $y=x$ and $y=2x$ are invariant lines through the origin; points on them are generally scaled, not fixed.
Do not impose Mv=v when the question asks only for an invariant line: that would find fixed points and miss directions that remain on the same line while being stretched or reversed.
With the syllabus convention $r\ge0$,x=r\cos\theta,\qquad y=r\sin\theta,\qquad r^2=x^2+y^2,\qquad \tan\theta=\frac yx\ (x\ne0).
Cartesian to polar: replace x and y by rcosθ and rsinθ, use x2+y2=r2, then simplify while retaining the stated angle and r≥0 conditions. For x2+y2=4x, r2=4rcosθ, giving r=4cosθ together with the pole r=0; dividing by r without checking would hide that point.
Polar to Cartesian: replace $r\cos\theta$ by x, $r\sin\theta$ by y and $r^2$ by $x^2+y^2$. Forr=2(\cos\theta+\sin\theta),multiplybyrtoobtainx^2+y^2=2x+2y,or(x-1)^2+(y-1)^2=2.
Do not introduce negative-r alternatives: this course uses r≥0. Algebraic conversion can add or lose points when multiplying, squaring or dividing, so check the pole, domain and original equation after simplifying.
Use the stated interval (normally 0≤θ<2π or −π<θ≤π): test symmetry by replacing theta with −θ, π−θ or θ+π; solve r=0 for pole visits; find intersections with the initial line at allowed angles representing that ray; solve dr/dθ=0 and check endpoints for least/greatest r; then join only the admissible r≥0 branches in increasing theta order.
At a pole value θ0 where r→0, the limiting angle gives the approach direction. Check whether the interval traces into and out of the pole, ends there, or meets it more than once; this distinguishes a crossing, cusp/loop contact or endpoint. Do not plot a formula-produced negative r on the opposite ray under this syllabus convention—restrict to where r is non-negative.
| Feature for r=a(1+cosθ), a>0 | Deduction |
|---|---|
| Symmetry | r(−θ)=r(θ), so symmetry about the initial line |
| Initial line | θ=0 gives (2a,0); the pole is also on every radial line |
| Pole | r=0 at θ=π; both sides approach along the same line, forming the cardioid cusp |
| Radial extrema | 0≤r≤2a; maximum 2a at θ=0, minimum 0 at θ=π |
A polar sketch is not the Cartesian graph of r against theta. The final plane curve must show symmetry, labelled initial-line intersections, correct pole behaviour and least/greatest radial distances; dense plotting is not required.
A thin sector of angle $d\theta$ has area approximately $\tfrac12r^2d\theta$. Therefore, when $r=f(\theta)$ traces the intended boundary once from $\alpha$ to $\beta$,A=\frac12\int_{\alpha}^{\beta}r^2,d\theta.
Find the boundary angles from intersections, the initial line or r=0. Check the sketch to ensure the interval covers the desired region once. Split at a pole or branch change when necessary. Between two curves on the same rays, use 21∫(router2−rinner2)dθ.
The upper half of $r=a(1+\cos\theta)$ is traced once for $0\le\theta\le\pi$. ThusA=\frac{a^2}{2}\int_0^\pi(1+\cos\theta)^2d\theta=\frac{a^2}{2}\int_0^\pi(1+2\cos\theta+\cos^2\theta)d\theta=\frac{3\pi a^2}{4}.
The integrand is r2, not r, and the factor one-half is essential. Squaring makes area non-negative, but it does not prevent double counting: only the sketch and angular traversal establish correct limits.
| Form | Meaning | Best use |
|---|---|---|
| ax+by+cz=d | Normal n=(a,b,c) | Membership, distances and intersections |
| r⋅n=p | Same normal form, with p=d | Compact vector reasoning |
| r=a+λb+μc | Point a and two non-parallel in-plane directions b,c | Generating points and lines in the plane |
Parametric to normal: compute n=b×c, then p=a⋅n. Normal to parametric: choose one point satisfying the equation and two independent vectors b,c satisfying b⋅n=c⋅n=0. Scale any equation or normal by a non-zero constant without changing the plane.
For\mathbf r=\begin{pmatrix}1\0\2\end{pmatrix}+\lambda\begin{pmatrix}1\1\0\end{pmatrix}+\mu\begin{pmatrix}0\1\1\end{pmatrix},\mathbf n=\begin{pmatrix}1\1\0\end{pmatrix}\times\begin{pmatrix}0\1\1\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1\-1\1\end{pmatrix},\qquad p=3.Hence $\mathbf r\cdot(1,-1,1)=3$, orx-y+z=3.
Verify that the base point satisfies the scalar equation and both direction vectors dot to zero with the normal. One point alone does not determine a plane; two parallel directions also fail to span one.
For the angle $0\le\theta\le\pi$ between non-zero vectors a and b,\mathbf a\times\mathbf b=|\mathbf a|,|\mathbf b|\sin\theta,\hat{\mathbf n},where $\hat{\mathbf n}$ is the unit normal selected by the right-hand rule. Thus $|\mathbf a\times\mathbf b|$ is the parallelogram area and half of it is the triangle area.
If $\mathbf a=(a_1,a_2,a_3)$ and $\mathbf b=(b_1,b_2,b_3)$,\mathbf a\times\mathbf b=(a_2b_3-a_3b_2,\ a_3b_1-a_1b_3,\ a_1b_2-a_2b_1).
For $\mathbf a=(1,2,-1)$ and $\mathbf b=(3,0,2)$,\mathbf a\times\mathbf b=(4,-5,-6).Check: $(4,-5,-6)\cdot(1,2,-1)=0$ and $(4,-5,-6)\cdot(3,0,2)=0$. Its magnitude is $\sqrt{77}$, so a unit normal is $\pm(4,-5,-6)/\sqrt{77}$.
b×a=−(a×b), and the product is zero exactly when the vectors are parallel (or one is zero). It is a vector, unlike the scalar dot product; verify both perpendicular dot products to catch component-sign errors.
For line r=a+λd and plane r⋅n=p:
| Question | Decisive calculation |
|---|---|
| Line versus plane | If d⋅n=0, substitute and solve one intersection. If it is 0, the line lies in the plane when a⋅n=p and is otherwise parallel/disjoint. |
| Foot H from point q | Set H=q+tn, where t=(p−q⋅n)/∣n∣2. |
| Point-plane distance | ∣q⋅n−p∣/∣n∣. |
| Acute line-plane angle alpha | sinα=∣d⋅n∣/(∣d∣∣n∣). |
| Acute plane-plane angle theta | cosθ=∣n1⋅n2∣/(∣n1∣∣n2∣). |
For two non-parallel planes, their intersection direction is n1×n2. Find one point satisfying both scalar equations (choose a convenient coordinate, then solve), and write the line as point plus a parameter times that direction.
For skew lines $L_1:\mathbf r=\mathbf a+\lambda\mathbf u$ and $L_2:\mathbf r=\mathbf b+\mu\mathbf v$, let $\mathbf w=\mathbf u\times\mathbf v$. Their shortest distance is\frac{|(\mathbf b-\mathbf a)\cdot\mathbf w|}{|\mathbf w|}. Tofindthecommonperpendicularitself,solve[\mathbf b+\mu\mathbf v-(\mathbf a+\lambda\mathbf u)]\cdot\mathbf u=0,[\mathbf b+\mu\mathbf v-(\mathbf a+\lambda\mathbf u)]\cdot\mathbf v=0.The resulting points P and Q determine $\mathbf r=\mathbf P+t(\mathbf Q-\mathbf P)$.
Example: from Q=(4,2,9) to 6x−y+8z=−7, use H=Q+t(6,−1,8). Substitution gives 94+101t=−7, so t=−1 and H=(−2,3,1). The displacement H−Q=(−6,1,−8) is parallel to the normal, and H satisfies the plane equation.
A line-plane angle is complementary to the direction-normal angle, which is why its formula uses sine. For skew lines, the shortest segment must be perpendicular to both directions; the distance between arbitrary selected points is not the answer.
To prove P(n) for every integer n≥n0: state the domain; verify P(n0); assume P(k) for an arbitrary integer k≥n0; start from the k+1 expression and use the hypothesis to obtain exactly P(k+1); conclude that P(n) holds for all integers in the stated domain by mathematical induction.
| Statement type | Productive k+1 move |
|---|---|
| Finite sum | Write Sk+1=Sk+ the new term, then substitute the hypothesis |
| Recurrence | Write the given uk+1 relation and substitute the formula for uk |
| Matrix identity | Form the next power/product and use the assumed matrix expression with order preserved |
| Divisibility by m | Rearrange the k+1 expression as a known multiple of m plus a multiple of the assumed divisible expression |
Claim: $24\mid(5^{2n}-1)$ for every positive integer n. Base: $5^2-1=24$. Assume $5^{2k}-1=24q$ for some integer q. Then5^{2(k+1)}-1=25\cdot5^{2k}-1=25(5^{2k}-1)+24=24(25q+1),sothek+1expressionisdivisibleby24.Hencetheclaimfollowsforallpositiveintegersn.
The hypothesis is not the conclusion: it may be used only for the arbitrary k case. A correct k-to-k+1 calculation without a valid base case establishes no starting chain, and numerical checks alone are not induction.
Calculate several exact cases and record the whole expression, not just decimal outputs. Look for factorial shifts, powers, finite differences or a stable algebraic form. State a conjecture with its starting index and domain, test one further case, then treat the conjecture only as the statement P(n) to be proved.
For Sn=∑r=1nrr!:
| n | Direct total | Revealing form |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 2!−1 |
| 2 | 1+4=5 | 3!−1 |
| 3 | 1+4+18=23 | 4!−1 |
Conjecture: Sn=(n+1)!−1 for every positive integer n.
Base: $S_1=1=2!-1$. Assume $S_k=(k+1)!-1$. ThenS_{k+1}=S_k+(k+1)(k+1)!=(k+1)!-1+(k+1)(k+1)!=(k+2)(k+1)!-1=(k+2)!-1.Thereforetheconjectureholdsforallpositiveintegersnbyinduction.
The same discovery route applies to repeated differentiation: compute the first few derivatives, factor out the common exponential term, conjecture the remaining n-pattern, and prove the successor by differentiating the assumed nth-derivative form.
Trials reveal a plausible formula but cannot establish universality. If the induction step fails, revise the conjecture or its domain; do not disguise extra examples as proof.