Why Do I Get Different Results When Calculating Powers and Indices?

  • Thread starter Thread starter peterspencers
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Indices
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on confusion regarding the calculation of powers and indices, specifically the difference between multiplying terms and squaring them. The user initially calculates 2t² x 3t² as 6t⁴ but encounters discrepancies when substituting t = 2, leading to incorrect results. Clarifications reveal that 2t² and 3t² should be interpreted as 2(t²) and 3(t²), not as 2t and 3t squared separately. The correct interpretation shows that both 2t² x 3t² and 6t⁴ yield the same result when calculated properly, emphasizing the importance of correctly applying exponent rules. Understanding the distinction between squaring individual components versus the entire expression resolves the confusion.
peterspencers
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Hi there, I am stuck, please can someone help me to understand where I am going wrong...

I have been learning about indices and i am confused.. here is an example of why..

2t squared x 3t squared = 6t power 4

but if i give t a value of 2..

2x2 squared = 16

3x2 squared = 36

16 x 36 = 576

but... 6x2 power 4 = 20736

why am i getting two different answers, what am I doing wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
(2*t)^2*(3*t)^2 is not the same thing as (6*t)^4 because if I expand them out, it comes out to be 36*t*t*t*t instead of (2*t)^2*(3*t)^2, and (6*t)^4 is 1296*t*t*t*t, which obviously do not equal each other unless t = 0.

I think you may be grouping them wrong, because if you simply move the parenthesis, you get 2*(t^2)*3*(t^2) = 6*(t^4) which is true because 2*(t^2)*3*(t^2) is the same thing as saying 6*t*t*t*t: I just multiplied the 3 and 2, and expanded the t^2's. 6*(t^4) is the same thing as saying 6*t*t*t*t as well, for the same reason, therefore they must equal each other.

If you are confused by the notation I am using, * means multiply, and ^ means to the power of.
 
peterspencers said:
Hi there, I am stuck, please can someone help me to understand where I am going wrong...

I have been learning about indices and i am confused.. here is an example of why..

2t squared x 3t squared = 6t power 4
There are better ways to represent what we in America call exponents.
1. Simplest - Use ^, which is notation that comes from the Basic programming language.
Your problem would appear as 2t^2 * 3t^2 = 6t^4
2. HTML tags - Click the Go Advanced button below the text input area. This causes the advanced menu to show across the top of the entry pane. The X2 button inserts tags around your exponent.
Your problem now looks like this: 2t2 * 3t2 = 6t4.
3. LaTeX script - I won't go into detail about how to do this, but you can find out more in this post: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3977517&postcount=3.
With LaTeX script your equation looks like this:
##2t^2 \cdot 3t^2 = 6t^4 ##
If you right-click on what I wrote, you can see the script that did it.
peterspencers said:
but if i give t a value of 2..

2x2 squared = 16

3x2 squared = 36
No to both. If t = 2, then 2t2 = 2 * 22 = 8, and 3t2 = 3 * 22 = 12.
So when t = 2, 2t2 * 3t2 = 8 * 12 = 96.

On the other hand, 6t4 = 6 * 24 = 6 * 16 = 96.
peterspencers said:
16 x 36 = 576

but... 6x2 power 4 = 20736

why am i getting two different answers, what am I doing wrong?

Instead of squaring just the variable (i.e., 2t2), you are squaring the whole thing, (2t)2). These are different. Same for the other factor, 3t2.
 
Thankyou so much :)
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top