MHB Rules of Exponents (4)^(1/5) * (4)^(1/5)

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathdad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponents Rules
AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the calculation of (4)^(1/5) * (4)^(1/5), confirming that it simplifies to 4^(2/5). Participants agree that both 4^(2/5) and 2^(4/5) are correct representations of the same value. The equivalence is explained by recognizing that 4 can be expressed as 2^2, leading to the conclusion that 4^(2/5) equals 2^(4/5). This highlights the concept that different forms can represent the same number in exponentiation. The conversation emphasizes understanding the underlying relationships between bases and exponents.
mathdad
Messages
1,280
Reaction score
0
Rules of Exponents

(4)^(1/5) * (4)^(1/5)

4^(1/5) + (1/5)

4^(2/5)

Correct?

Is the answer 2^(4/5)?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes, everything you posted is correct. (Yes)
 
MarkFL said:
Yes, everything you posted is correct. (Yes)

What is the difference between 4^(2/5) and 2^(4/5) as the answer?

How can both answers be correct?
 
RTCNTC said:
What is the difference between 4^(2/5) and 2^(4/5) as the answer?

How can both answers be correct?

They are just different form for the same number...just like 2^4 and 4^2 can both represent 16. :D
 
I hope that you know that 4= 2^2! So 4^{2/5}= (2^2)^{2/5}= 2^{4/5}.
 
Thank you everyone.
 

Thread 'Non-orthogonal bases'

Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
View full post »
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'

Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'

I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Geometry problem of interest with a 3-4-5 triangle
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
MHB Solve $2+5\ln{x}=21$: Find $x$
Replies
5
Views
1K
B About a definition: What is the number of terms of a polynomial P(x)?
Replies
48
Views
3K
MHB Calculating Exponents for Business Model
Replies
5
Views
2K
MHB Solve the Puzzle: 4, 5, 14, 185, .... - Ray Salmon
Replies
5
Views
3K
I What is the missing number in this number sequence pattern?
Replies
3
Views
3K
A new form of addition?
Replies
8
Views
1K
B Can Higher Degree Nested Radicals Be Simplified?
Replies
41
Views
5K
MHB Divisibility of (1!+2!+3!+...+100!)^2 by 5
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Is x+1 a Factor of the Polynomial x^3-5x^2+3x+1?
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top