You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c
First off;
How to tackle (3x^2)^c?
If c was, say, 2, then we would have; (3x^2)(3x^2), yeah?
Which would = 9x^4, yeah?
Can we do; (3x^2)^c = 3x^2*c? (multiply the exponents, 2*c)
Which would, if c was 2, = 3x^4
No? Because we already got = 9x^4?
*
And then with the whole equation; what can we do to both sides?
The only thing I can think of is to divide both sides by b, but that looks awkward - making the right hand side a fraction with b on the bottom!
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
To avoid confusion or for clarity, I used to add '*' always to denote a product.
For example
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c becomes:
b*(x^6) = [3*(x^2)]^c
Now we can also write it as:
b*(x^6) = (3^c)*[(x^2)]^c
b*(x^6) = (3^c)*[x^(2*c)]
etc...
Last edited by KerimF (2024-05-16 09:57:51)
Every living thing has no choice but to execute its pre-programmed instructions embedded in it (known as instincts).
But only a human may have the freedom and ability to oppose his natural robotic nature.
But, by opposing it, such a human becomes no more of this world.
Offline
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c
What are we meant to do with this expression?
Bob
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c
What are we meant to do with this expression?
Bob
I asked myself that very same question.
Offline
To avoid confusion or for clarity, I used to add '*' always to denote a product.
For example
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c becomes:
b*(x^6) = [3*(x^2)]^cNow we can also write it as:
b*(x^6) = (3^c)*[(x^2)]^c
b*(x^6) = (3^c)*[x^(2*c)]
etc...
Thanks, KerimF
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
bx^6 = (3x^2)^c
What are we meant to do with this expression?
Bob
Doh! I forgot to add the crucial part; find out the value of b, and the value of c.
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
I thought I was missing something
As x can anything you can equate the non x bits and separately the x bits
Bob
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
Thanks, Bob
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
I thought I was missing something
As x can anything you can equate the non x bits and separately the x bits
Bob
Nicely-done!
Offline
"As x can anything you can equate the non x bits and separately the x bits"
x is a variable, yeah?
Are b and c not variables? Can they not be anything?
I know you've shown them to be 27,3, here, but how do I know when first looking at the problem that b and c are different from x (in terms of the latter being able to be anything)?
Is there no permuation of values where b and c could equal something different?
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
I get what you're saying but I don't think so. From the wording b and c have values we can compute whereas x is truely a variable in the sense that, once you have computed b and c, the equation has to hold true whatever value x takes.
Like the circle question this is something I've always accepted and used without questioning it. I like that you do question it; that's the mark of a true mathematician. So now I'll have to think up a proof for paragraph 1.
LATER EDIT:
Substitute some values:
x = 1 => b = 3^c .........equation a
x = 2 => 64b= (3 times 4)^c = 3^c times 4^c .........equation b
Substitute a into b => 64b = b times 4^c => 4^c = 64 => c = 3
=> b = 27
Bob
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
Thanks a lot, Bob.
Prioritise. Persevere. No pain, no gain.
Offline
I get what you're saying but I don't think so. From the wording b and c have values we can compute whereas x is truely a variable in the sense that, once you have computed b and c, the equation has to hold true whatever value x takes.
Like the circle question this is something I've always accepted and used without questioning it. I like that you do question it; that's the mark of a true mathematician. So now I'll have to think up a proof for paragraph 1.
LATER EDIT:
Substitute some values:
x = 1 => b = 3^c .........equation a
x = 2 => 64b= (3 times 4)^c = 3^c times 4^c .........equation b
Substitute a into b => 64b = b times 4^c => 4^c = 64 => c = 3
=> b = 27
Bob
Another great reply and effort. We need more people like Bob here.
Offline
Pages: 1