Why is the square root of x^9 not equal to x^4.5?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical expression of the square root of x^9 and its equivalence to x^(4.5). Participants explore the discrepancies observed when using calculators to compute these values, questioning why they do not always yield the same results, particularly in terms of numerical precision and accuracy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that calculators may produce different results for \(\sqrt{x^9}\) and \(x^{4.5}\) due to inherent numerical errors in their algorithms.
  • One participant mentions that while theoretically \(\sqrt{x^9} = x^{4.5}\), practical calculations can yield slight differences, especially with specific values of x.
  • Another participant suggests that the discrepancies might arise from how many digits calculators compute versus how many they display.
  • There is a discussion about the methods calculators use for computations, with some arguing that they employ more sophisticated techniques than Taylor series.
  • One participant provides specific numerical outputs from a TI-89 calculator, highlighting a very small difference between the two expressions, which they find puzzling.
  • Another participant shares experiences with Maple software, noting similar discrepancies in results unless precision settings are adjusted.
  • There is a mention of the limitations of calculators in representing continuous real numbers, suggesting that they can only display values at certain discrete intervals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that theoretically \(\sqrt{x^9}\) should equal \(x^{4.5}\), but they acknowledge that practical calculations can show discrepancies due to numerical precision issues. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact nature and implications of these differences.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the precision of calculators and software, noting that discrepancies can arise from the number of digits calculated versus displayed. There are also references to specific software versions and their handling of precision, indicating that results may vary based on settings.

TSN79
Messages
422
Reaction score
0
Why is it that the square root of x^9 for some x isn't always the same as x^(4,5) ? I tried to do this with x=12 on my TI-89 and it comes very close, the difference comes after like the 8th decimal or something, but shouldn't it be excactly the same?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The algorithms for generation:

[tex]\sqrt{x^9}[/tex]

And:

[tex]x^{4.5}[/tex]

Will be different for some fixed value of x, as it goes calculators aren't perfect. Back in my further maths class we used to compare the error of our graphical calculators, for calculating exponentials where the results tended to lie around 10^9 Sharp calculators would tend be about 0.1 below the actual answer and Casio ones would be about 0.2 above the actual answer. But these problems often only arise over complex numerical calculations that inherently generate error, seems a bit odd that this would be slightly out.
 
But in theory these two should be exactly the same right?
 
Yes, in theory.
 
Humm... I don't see that happening oh my old HP28c.

Yes, [itex]\sqrt {x^9} = x^{4.5}[/itex]. I kinda thought all calculators were about the same, makes me appreciate what I have a bit more. It may be in how many digits are calculated and how many are displayed. I believe HPs calculate a couple more digits then they display. IIRC they calculate 15 and display 12.
 
Integral said:
Humm... I don't see that happening oh my old HP28c.

Yes, [itex]\sqrt {x^9} = x^{4.5}[/itex]. I kinda thought all calculators were about the same, makes me appreciate what I have a bit more. It may be in how many digits are calculated and how many are displayed. I believe HPs calculate a couple more digits then they display. IIRC they calculate 15 and display 12.
My Dad still thinks his HP41C is just about the best calculator ever made..
 
Calculators use expansions and Taylor series to compute complex functions. They are usually accurate to the amount of digits they display but not perfect.

Rest assured x^9^(1/2) = x^(4.5). You should be able to prove this easily.
 
Actually, I think calculators use much more clever methods than Taylor series, but enough nitpicking.

Anyways, one description I've heard, which I like, is that the operations you do on a calculator are not the operations you do on paper.

For example, numeric addition is not even an associative operation!
 
how many places of accuaracy does your calculator have, 7? What is that 1/10,000,000? So imagine a continuous real line of numbers.

let the choice of unit length be say 10,000,000 miles. then divide it up so that you make a mark every mile. then the only numbers on the number line that appear on your calculator are the ones at the mile markers. I.e. every number between the one mile and 2 mile marker, is invisible to your calculator.


calculators basically have no accuracy at all, in the big picture.
 
  • #10
arildno said:
My Dad still thinks his HP41C is just about the best calculator ever made..
He may well be right.
 
  • #11
Well, here is what my TI-89 returns:

[tex]\sqrt(12^9)=71831,611091496[/tex]
[tex]12^{4,5}=71831,611091497[/tex]

Not a difference worth mentioning really, but I still find it strange that it displays a diff at all...
What got me spooked in the first place was that I typed in [tex]\sqrt(12^9)=12^{4,5}[/tex] and the TI-89 returned "false"! I was like "what?!?", had I missed the whole concept of square roots?? Thanks to you all, I now know I hadn't...
 
Last edited:
  • #12
If your calculator works with, say only 1 hidden decimal here, I wouldn't think this very strange.
 
  • #13
Even the newest version of Maple (professional-quality math software) makes errors like that if you don't tell it to increase its precision (strangely enough, Maple 8 did not seem to have these problems).

> evalf(sqrt(12^9));
71831.6110914964791171702546751
> evalf(12^4.5);
71831.6110914964791171702546749

Note that if I increase the precision these digits no longer differ:

> Digits:=50;
Digits := 50
> evalf(sqrt(12^9));
71831.611091496479117170254674931538801852019486025
> evalf(12^4.5);
71831.611091496479117170254674931538801852019486024

but the last ones still disagree!

Stupid computers.
 
  • #14
It is a little smarter than your calculator though:

solve(x^4.5 = sqrt(x^9));
x

~
 

Similar threads

High School Why Must the Expression Inside a Square Root Be Non-Negative?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Undergrad Were you taught square root extraction at school?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
High School Solving Irrational Inequality: Why Square Root Matters
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School Derivative of Square Root of x at 0
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
MHB Why Are Square Roots of Cubes Not Always Equal?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Principal square root of a complex number, why is it unique?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
Graduate Approximation to an average of integer square roots
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Alternating Harmonic Numbers are cool, spread the word!
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
High School Why do we use squared quantities in equations and formulae?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
High School Fermat's Last Theorem; unacceptable proof, why?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K