Partial fraction expansion confusionDerivation of the general forms of partial fractionsWhy do you need two fractions for partial fraction decomposition with repeated factors?How can the correct form of the partial fractions decomposition be found for arbitrary rational functions?Integration - Partial Fraction DecompositionPartial Fraction Expansion of Transfer FunctionHow to solve Partial Fraction- Improper FractionsPartial Fraction Solution?Extra Square in Partial FractionLaurent Expansion partial fractionsComplicated partial fraction expansionIntegration of Partial Fraction ExpansionSimple partial fraction expansionConfusion with how partial fractions work

Why are UK visa biometrics appointments suspended at USCIS Application Support Centers?

How does a dynamic QR code work?

Avoiding the "not like other girls" trope?

Am I breaking OOP practice with this architecture?

Send out email when Apex Queueable fails and test it

In the UK, is it possible to get a referendum by a court decision?

Why was Sir Cadogan fired?

How to enclose theorems and definition in rectangles?

What is the fastest integer factorization to break RSA?

Why was the shrink from 8″ made only to 5.25″ and not smaller (4″ or less)

How do conventional missiles fly?

How to coordinate airplane tickets?

Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic

Does Dispel Magic work on Tiny Hut?

How exploitable/balanced is this homebrew spell: Spell Permanency?

Processor speed limited at 0.4 Ghz

What is the opposite of "eschatology"?

Where would I need my direct neural interface to be implanted?

Did 'Cinema Songs' exist during Hiranyakshipu's time?

Why is the sentence "Das ist eine Nase" correct?

Getting extremely large arrows with tikzcd

How seriously should I take size and weight limits of hand luggage?

Why do I get negative height?

How can saying a song's name be a copyright violation?



Partial fraction expansion confusion


Derivation of the general forms of partial fractionsWhy do you need two fractions for partial fraction decomposition with repeated factors?How can the correct form of the partial fractions decomposition be found for arbitrary rational functions?Integration - Partial Fraction DecompositionPartial Fraction Expansion of Transfer FunctionHow to solve Partial Fraction- Improper FractionsPartial Fraction Solution?Extra Square in Partial FractionLaurent Expansion partial fractionsComplicated partial fraction expansionIntegration of Partial Fraction ExpansionSimple partial fraction expansionConfusion with how partial fractions work













1












$begingroup$


Can someone please explain why: $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+fracBs^2+fracC(s+2)$$



And not:$$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2)$$



I'm a bit confused where the extra s term comes from in the first equation.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    More answers here too
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    4 mins ago















1












$begingroup$


Can someone please explain why: $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+fracBs^2+fracC(s+2)$$



And not:$$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2)$$



I'm a bit confused where the extra s term comes from in the first equation.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    More answers here too
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    4 mins ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


Can someone please explain why: $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+fracBs^2+fracC(s+2)$$



And not:$$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2)$$



I'm a bit confused where the extra s term comes from in the first equation.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Can someone please explain why: $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+fracBs^2+fracC(s+2)$$



And not:$$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2)$$



I'm a bit confused where the extra s term comes from in the first equation.







partial-fractions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 1 hour ago









stuartstuart

1968




1968











  • $begingroup$
    There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    More answers here too
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    4 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    More answers here too
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    4 mins ago















$begingroup$
There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
$endgroup$
– callculus
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
There are many answers available on MSE, i.e. here and here
$endgroup$
– callculus
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
More answers here too
$endgroup$
– David K
4 mins ago




$begingroup$
More answers here too
$endgroup$
– David K
4 mins ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

The general result is the following.




Suppose that the degree of $p(s)$ is less than the degree of $q(s)$, and that $q(s)=q_1(s)q_2(s)$ where $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ have no common factor. Then there exist polynomials $r_1(s)$ and $r_2(s)$, with degrees less than $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ respectively, such that
$$fracp(s)q(s)=fracr_1(s)q_1(s)+fracr_2(s)q_2(s) .$$




In your case the denominator factorises as $s^2$ times $s+2$ so you have
$$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+Bs^2+fracCs+2 .$$
It is then usually more convenient (though not obligatory) to split up the first fraction, which gives your answer.



Note that you cannot, for the purposes of the above result, regard the denominator as $s$ times $s(s+2)$, because these polynomials do have a common factor.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    2












    $begingroup$

    If your denominator has a factor of the form $(as+b)^n$ then to write partial fractions you should write all the powers up to $n$, i.e. $fracAas+b+fracB(as+b)^2+cdots+fracZ(as+b)^n$. In the case you showed, you have that $s^2$ is a factor of the denominator and that's why in partial fractions you should write the terms $fracAs+fracBs^2$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
      $endgroup$
      – David K
      2 mins ago


















    2












    $begingroup$

    That is because for
    $$fracas^2+bs+cs^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2),$$
    the left hand side has three parameters $a,b,c$, but the right hand side only has two parameters $a,b$. And if you try to solve TWO values from THREE equations, it will usually lead to a contradiction. So a third term of the right is needed. Even though this is not obvious in your question, you should think 1 as a degree 2 polynomial.



    Or more simply, consider the example
    $$
    fracs+1s^2=frac1s^2+frac1s
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$




















      1












      $begingroup$

      One can immediately see why in this case the partial fraction expansion will lead to a nonzero coefficient for the $1/s$ term. The asymptotic behavior of the fraction for large $s$ is $sim 1/s^3$. The singularity at $s = -2$ contributes a term proportional to $1/(s+2)$ to the partial fraction expansion, which for large $s$ behaves like $sim 1/s$. This $sim 1/s$ must be canceled out by the partial fraction expansion terms coming from the singularity at $s = 0$, this requires the presence of a contribution proportional to $1/s$.



      By making this reasoning more precise we can get to the complete partial fraction expansion using only the contribution from the singularity at $s = -2$. The amplitude of the $1/(s+2)$ term in the partial fraction expansion is given by the factor that multiplies it in the fraction evaluated at $s = -2$, this is therefore equal to $1/4$. So the contribution to the partial fraction expansion coming from the singularity at $s = -2$ is:



      $$frac14(s+2)$$



      For large $s$ we can expand this in powers of $1/s$:



      $$frac14(s+2) = frac14 sfrac11+frac2s = frac14s - frac12 s^2 + mathcalOleft(frac1s^3right)$$



      The singularity at $s = 0$ will contribute terms to the partial fraction expansion whose large $s$ behavior will have to cancel out these first two terms, this means that this contribution to the partial fraction expansion is:



      $$frac12 s^2-frac14s $$



      The complete partial fraction expansion is thus given by:



      $$frac12 s^2-frac14s + frac14(s+2) $$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













        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',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        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%2f3172683%2fpartial-fraction-expansion-confusion%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









        3












        $begingroup$

        The general result is the following.




        Suppose that the degree of $p(s)$ is less than the degree of $q(s)$, and that $q(s)=q_1(s)q_2(s)$ where $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ have no common factor. Then there exist polynomials $r_1(s)$ and $r_2(s)$, with degrees less than $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ respectively, such that
        $$fracp(s)q(s)=fracr_1(s)q_1(s)+fracr_2(s)q_2(s) .$$




        In your case the denominator factorises as $s^2$ times $s+2$ so you have
        $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+Bs^2+fracCs+2 .$$
        It is then usually more convenient (though not obligatory) to split up the first fraction, which gives your answer.



        Note that you cannot, for the purposes of the above result, regard the denominator as $s$ times $s(s+2)$, because these polynomials do have a common factor.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$

















          3












          $begingroup$

          The general result is the following.




          Suppose that the degree of $p(s)$ is less than the degree of $q(s)$, and that $q(s)=q_1(s)q_2(s)$ where $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ have no common factor. Then there exist polynomials $r_1(s)$ and $r_2(s)$, with degrees less than $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ respectively, such that
          $$fracp(s)q(s)=fracr_1(s)q_1(s)+fracr_2(s)q_2(s) .$$




          In your case the denominator factorises as $s^2$ times $s+2$ so you have
          $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+Bs^2+fracCs+2 .$$
          It is then usually more convenient (though not obligatory) to split up the first fraction, which gives your answer.



          Note that you cannot, for the purposes of the above result, regard the denominator as $s$ times $s(s+2)$, because these polynomials do have a common factor.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$















            3












            3








            3





            $begingroup$

            The general result is the following.




            Suppose that the degree of $p(s)$ is less than the degree of $q(s)$, and that $q(s)=q_1(s)q_2(s)$ where $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ have no common factor. Then there exist polynomials $r_1(s)$ and $r_2(s)$, with degrees less than $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ respectively, such that
            $$fracp(s)q(s)=fracr_1(s)q_1(s)+fracr_2(s)q_2(s) .$$




            In your case the denominator factorises as $s^2$ times $s+2$ so you have
            $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+Bs^2+fracCs+2 .$$
            It is then usually more convenient (though not obligatory) to split up the first fraction, which gives your answer.



            Note that you cannot, for the purposes of the above result, regard the denominator as $s$ times $s(s+2)$, because these polynomials do have a common factor.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            The general result is the following.




            Suppose that the degree of $p(s)$ is less than the degree of $q(s)$, and that $q(s)=q_1(s)q_2(s)$ where $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ have no common factor. Then there exist polynomials $r_1(s)$ and $r_2(s)$, with degrees less than $q_1(s)$ and $q_2(s)$ respectively, such that
            $$fracp(s)q(s)=fracr_1(s)q_1(s)+fracr_2(s)q_2(s) .$$




            In your case the denominator factorises as $s^2$ times $s+2$ so you have
            $$frac1s^2(s+2)=fracAs+Bs^2+fracCs+2 .$$
            It is then usually more convenient (though not obligatory) to split up the first fraction, which gives your answer.



            Note that you cannot, for the purposes of the above result, regard the denominator as $s$ times $s(s+2)$, because these polynomials do have a common factor.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            DavidDavid

            69.7k668131




            69.7k668131





















                2












                $begingroup$

                If your denominator has a factor of the form $(as+b)^n$ then to write partial fractions you should write all the powers up to $n$, i.e. $fracAas+b+fracB(as+b)^2+cdots+fracZ(as+b)^n$. In the case you showed, you have that $s^2$ is a factor of the denominator and that's why in partial fractions you should write the terms $fracAs+fracBs^2$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$












                • $begingroup$
                  That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                  $endgroup$
                  – David K
                  2 mins ago















                2












                $begingroup$

                If your denominator has a factor of the form $(as+b)^n$ then to write partial fractions you should write all the powers up to $n$, i.e. $fracAas+b+fracB(as+b)^2+cdots+fracZ(as+b)^n$. In the case you showed, you have that $s^2$ is a factor of the denominator and that's why in partial fractions you should write the terms $fracAs+fracBs^2$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$












                • $begingroup$
                  That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                  $endgroup$
                  – David K
                  2 mins ago













                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                If your denominator has a factor of the form $(as+b)^n$ then to write partial fractions you should write all the powers up to $n$, i.e. $fracAas+b+fracB(as+b)^2+cdots+fracZ(as+b)^n$. In the case you showed, you have that $s^2$ is a factor of the denominator and that's why in partial fractions you should write the terms $fracAs+fracBs^2$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                If your denominator has a factor of the form $(as+b)^n$ then to write partial fractions you should write all the powers up to $n$, i.e. $fracAas+b+fracB(as+b)^2+cdots+fracZ(as+b)^n$. In the case you showed, you have that $s^2$ is a factor of the denominator and that's why in partial fractions you should write the terms $fracAs+fracBs^2$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 1 hour ago









                Julian MejiaJulian Mejia

                39328




                39328











                • $begingroup$
                  That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                  $endgroup$
                  – David K
                  2 mins ago
















                • $begingroup$
                  That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                  $endgroup$
                  – David K
                  2 mins ago















                $begingroup$
                That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                $endgroup$
                – David K
                2 mins ago




                $begingroup$
                That's the rule, but I think the question was asking why is that the rule.
                $endgroup$
                – David K
                2 mins ago











                2












                $begingroup$

                That is because for
                $$fracas^2+bs+cs^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2),$$
                the left hand side has three parameters $a,b,c$, but the right hand side only has two parameters $a,b$. And if you try to solve TWO values from THREE equations, it will usually lead to a contradiction. So a third term of the right is needed. Even though this is not obvious in your question, you should think 1 as a degree 2 polynomial.



                Or more simply, consider the example
                $$
                fracs+1s^2=frac1s^2+frac1s
                $$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$

















                  2












                  $begingroup$

                  That is because for
                  $$fracas^2+bs+cs^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2),$$
                  the left hand side has three parameters $a,b,c$, but the right hand side only has two parameters $a,b$. And if you try to solve TWO values from THREE equations, it will usually lead to a contradiction. So a third term of the right is needed. Even though this is not obvious in your question, you should think 1 as a degree 2 polynomial.



                  Or more simply, consider the example
                  $$
                  fracs+1s^2=frac1s^2+frac1s
                  $$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$















                    2












                    2








                    2





                    $begingroup$

                    That is because for
                    $$fracas^2+bs+cs^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2),$$
                    the left hand side has three parameters $a,b,c$, but the right hand side only has two parameters $a,b$. And if you try to solve TWO values from THREE equations, it will usually lead to a contradiction. So a third term of the right is needed. Even though this is not obvious in your question, you should think 1 as a degree 2 polynomial.



                    Or more simply, consider the example
                    $$
                    fracs+1s^2=frac1s^2+frac1s
                    $$






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    That is because for
                    $$fracas^2+bs+cs^2(s+2)=fracAs^2+fracB(s+2),$$
                    the left hand side has three parameters $a,b,c$, but the right hand side only has two parameters $a,b$. And if you try to solve TWO values from THREE equations, it will usually lead to a contradiction. So a third term of the right is needed. Even though this is not obvious in your question, you should think 1 as a degree 2 polynomial.



                    Or more simply, consider the example
                    $$
                    fracs+1s^2=frac1s^2+frac1s
                    $$







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered 1 hour ago









                    Holding ArthurHolding Arthur

                    1,360417




                    1,360417





















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        One can immediately see why in this case the partial fraction expansion will lead to a nonzero coefficient for the $1/s$ term. The asymptotic behavior of the fraction for large $s$ is $sim 1/s^3$. The singularity at $s = -2$ contributes a term proportional to $1/(s+2)$ to the partial fraction expansion, which for large $s$ behaves like $sim 1/s$. This $sim 1/s$ must be canceled out by the partial fraction expansion terms coming from the singularity at $s = 0$, this requires the presence of a contribution proportional to $1/s$.



                        By making this reasoning more precise we can get to the complete partial fraction expansion using only the contribution from the singularity at $s = -2$. The amplitude of the $1/(s+2)$ term in the partial fraction expansion is given by the factor that multiplies it in the fraction evaluated at $s = -2$, this is therefore equal to $1/4$. So the contribution to the partial fraction expansion coming from the singularity at $s = -2$ is:



                        $$frac14(s+2)$$



                        For large $s$ we can expand this in powers of $1/s$:



                        $$frac14(s+2) = frac14 sfrac11+frac2s = frac14s - frac12 s^2 + mathcalOleft(frac1s^3right)$$



                        The singularity at $s = 0$ will contribute terms to the partial fraction expansion whose large $s$ behavior will have to cancel out these first two terms, this means that this contribution to the partial fraction expansion is:



                        $$frac12 s^2-frac14s $$



                        The complete partial fraction expansion is thus given by:



                        $$frac12 s^2-frac14s + frac14(s+2) $$






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$

















                          1












                          $begingroup$

                          One can immediately see why in this case the partial fraction expansion will lead to a nonzero coefficient for the $1/s$ term. The asymptotic behavior of the fraction for large $s$ is $sim 1/s^3$. The singularity at $s = -2$ contributes a term proportional to $1/(s+2)$ to the partial fraction expansion, which for large $s$ behaves like $sim 1/s$. This $sim 1/s$ must be canceled out by the partial fraction expansion terms coming from the singularity at $s = 0$, this requires the presence of a contribution proportional to $1/s$.



                          By making this reasoning more precise we can get to the complete partial fraction expansion using only the contribution from the singularity at $s = -2$. The amplitude of the $1/(s+2)$ term in the partial fraction expansion is given by the factor that multiplies it in the fraction evaluated at $s = -2$, this is therefore equal to $1/4$. So the contribution to the partial fraction expansion coming from the singularity at $s = -2$ is:



                          $$frac14(s+2)$$



                          For large $s$ we can expand this in powers of $1/s$:



                          $$frac14(s+2) = frac14 sfrac11+frac2s = frac14s - frac12 s^2 + mathcalOleft(frac1s^3right)$$



                          The singularity at $s = 0$ will contribute terms to the partial fraction expansion whose large $s$ behavior will have to cancel out these first two terms, this means that this contribution to the partial fraction expansion is:



                          $$frac12 s^2-frac14s $$



                          The complete partial fraction expansion is thus given by:



                          $$frac12 s^2-frac14s + frac14(s+2) $$






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$















                            1












                            1








                            1





                            $begingroup$

                            One can immediately see why in this case the partial fraction expansion will lead to a nonzero coefficient for the $1/s$ term. The asymptotic behavior of the fraction for large $s$ is $sim 1/s^3$. The singularity at $s = -2$ contributes a term proportional to $1/(s+2)$ to the partial fraction expansion, which for large $s$ behaves like $sim 1/s$. This $sim 1/s$ must be canceled out by the partial fraction expansion terms coming from the singularity at $s = 0$, this requires the presence of a contribution proportional to $1/s$.



                            By making this reasoning more precise we can get to the complete partial fraction expansion using only the contribution from the singularity at $s = -2$. The amplitude of the $1/(s+2)$ term in the partial fraction expansion is given by the factor that multiplies it in the fraction evaluated at $s = -2$, this is therefore equal to $1/4$. So the contribution to the partial fraction expansion coming from the singularity at $s = -2$ is:



                            $$frac14(s+2)$$



                            For large $s$ we can expand this in powers of $1/s$:



                            $$frac14(s+2) = frac14 sfrac11+frac2s = frac14s - frac12 s^2 + mathcalOleft(frac1s^3right)$$



                            The singularity at $s = 0$ will contribute terms to the partial fraction expansion whose large $s$ behavior will have to cancel out these first two terms, this means that this contribution to the partial fraction expansion is:



                            $$frac12 s^2-frac14s $$



                            The complete partial fraction expansion is thus given by:



                            $$frac12 s^2-frac14s + frac14(s+2) $$






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            One can immediately see why in this case the partial fraction expansion will lead to a nonzero coefficient for the $1/s$ term. The asymptotic behavior of the fraction for large $s$ is $sim 1/s^3$. The singularity at $s = -2$ contributes a term proportional to $1/(s+2)$ to the partial fraction expansion, which for large $s$ behaves like $sim 1/s$. This $sim 1/s$ must be canceled out by the partial fraction expansion terms coming from the singularity at $s = 0$, this requires the presence of a contribution proportional to $1/s$.



                            By making this reasoning more precise we can get to the complete partial fraction expansion using only the contribution from the singularity at $s = -2$. The amplitude of the $1/(s+2)$ term in the partial fraction expansion is given by the factor that multiplies it in the fraction evaluated at $s = -2$, this is therefore equal to $1/4$. So the contribution to the partial fraction expansion coming from the singularity at $s = -2$ is:



                            $$frac14(s+2)$$



                            For large $s$ we can expand this in powers of $1/s$:



                            $$frac14(s+2) = frac14 sfrac11+frac2s = frac14s - frac12 s^2 + mathcalOleft(frac1s^3right)$$



                            The singularity at $s = 0$ will contribute terms to the partial fraction expansion whose large $s$ behavior will have to cancel out these first two terms, this means that this contribution to the partial fraction expansion is:



                            $$frac12 s^2-frac14s $$



                            The complete partial fraction expansion is thus given by:



                            $$frac12 s^2-frac14s + frac14(s+2) $$







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered 53 mins ago









                            Count IblisCount Iblis

                            8,51221534




                            8,51221534



























                                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.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3172683%2fpartial-fraction-expansion-confusion%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

                                Möglingen Índice Localización Historia Demografía Referencias Enlaces externos Menú de navegación48°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.129166666666748°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.1291666666667Sitio web oficial Mapa de Möglingen«Gemeinden in Deutschland nach Fläche, Bevölkerung und Postleitzahl am 30.09.2016»Möglingen

                                Virtualbox - Configuration error: Querying “UUID” failed (VERR_CFGM_VALUE_NOT_FOUND)“VERR_SUPLIB_WORLD_WRITABLE” error when trying to installing OS in virtualboxVirtual Box Kernel errorFailed to open a seesion for the virtual machineFailed to open a session for the virtual machineUbuntu 14.04 LTS Virtualbox errorcan't use VM VirtualBoxusing virtualboxI can't run Linux-64 Bit on VirtualBoxUnable to insert the virtual optical disk (VBoxguestaddition) in virtual machine for ubuntu server in win 10VirtuaBox in Ubuntu 18.04 Issues with Win10.ISO Installation

                                Torre de la Isleta Índice Véase también Referencias Bibliografía Enlaces externos Menú de navegación38°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.3838888938°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.38388889Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta o Torre Saleta. Base de datos de bienes inmuebles. Patrimonio Cultural. Secretaría de Estado de CulturaFicha BIC Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta. Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural. Generalitat ValencianaLugares de interés. Ayuntamiento del CampelloTorre de la Isleta en CastillosNet.org