Unexpected Result on TI-89 Titanium for Equation with Negative Exponents

  • Context: Calculators 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kald13
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Ti-89 Titanium
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on unexpected results from the TI-89 Titanium calculator when evaluating equations with negative exponents, specifically the expression 2(-2^3)-3(-2^2). Users report that while the individual components calculate correctly as -16 and 12, the overall expression yields -4 instead of the expected -28. The issue arises from operator precedence and the distinction between unary and binary operators on the calculator. To achieve the correct result, users recommend defining a variable for -2 and substituting it into the equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of operator precedence in mathematical expressions
  • Familiarity with the TI-89 Titanium calculator functions
  • Knowledge of unary versus binary operators
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the operator precedence rules specific to the TI-89 Titanium calculator
  • Learn how to effectively use variables in TI-89 calculations
  • Explore the differences between unary and binary operators in mathematical notation
  • Study examples of complex expressions involving negative exponents and their evaluations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone using the TI-89 Titanium calculator for algebraic computations, particularly those dealing with negative exponents and operator precedence issues.

kald13
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I was working with a much longer equation and receiving a result I didn't expect, and finally narrowed it down to the following section:

2(-2^3)-3(-2^2)

2(-2^3) is correctly calculated as -16 independently, and 3(-2^2) is correctly calculated as 12 (again, independently) for a difference of -28, but my calculator is returning -4.

No matter how I enter the equation, the only way I obtain a correct result is by first defining a variable as -2 and then substituting that variable in for -2 in the equation.

Is this problem repeated on anyone else's unit? And if you've encountered this sort of problem before, is there a way to correct it?
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
Is -22 intended to mean -(22) or (-2)2?
 
I will use (-) for the negative operator

I hope 3((-)2^2) is not calculated as 12 that would be very wrong

3((-)2^2)=-12 due to operator precedence

2((-)2^3)-3((-)2^2)=2((-)(2^3))-3((-)(2^2))=-4

perhaps you had intended to write

2(((-)2)^3)-3(((-)2)^2)=-28
 
There are a number of different ways to enter the problem to achieve the intended result. I have tried a few variations, all with the same results.

(2*((-2)^3))-(3*((-2)^2))=-4
(2*((z)^3))-(3*((z)^2))=-28

This is a piece of the derivative of a function, and -2 is one of the zeros of the derivative signifying a local maximum in the function. The intent is to solve the equation when z=-2 (among other values)

Incidentally, entering the equation in the calculator as I originally did produces the same results; the intent is not to find -(2^3) (which is -8) but (-2^3) (which is also -8, but for a different reason).

(2*-2^3)-(3*-2^2)=-4
(2*z^3)-(3*z^2)=-28
 
^Of those four only the first one is surprising. If that input gives that output I am quite confused.
What happens if you enter
2((0-2)^3)-3((0-2)^2)
?
I do not have a ti89 handy
I do know that the manual gives the example
((-1)2)^2=4
(-)2^2=-4
 
lurflurf said:
I will use (-) for the negative operator

I hope 3((-)2^2) is not calculated as 12 that would be very wrong
The above is a very silly use of parentheses.

(-2)2 should evaluate to +4.
-22 should evaluate to -4.
lurflurf said:
3((-)2^2)=-12 due to operator precedence
The trouble with this notation, above, is that the - sign is not binding to anything.
lurflurf said:
2((-)2^3)-3((-)2^2)=2((-)(2^3))-3((-)(2^2))=-4

perhaps you had intended to write

2(((-)2)^3)-3(((-)2)^2)=-28
 
^It is not silly, it is to distinguish between the unary and binary operators. It is the same notation used on the calculator keypad. For you special
3(-<<<the unary one>>>2^2)

to quote the manual

$$\text{Important: Use }\bbox[3px,border:2px solid black]{\phantom( - \phantom)}\text{ for subtraction and use }\bbox[3px,border:2px solid black]{(-)}\text{ for negation.}$$
 
Last edited:
Mark, not sure if you know it, but TI-89 has two different minus keys.

TI-89_minus_keys.jpg


The one with "(-)" is an unary "change sign" operator, the other is a binary "minus". Hence the "(-)" and "-" notation is just reflecting the reality.
 
Borek said:
Mark, not sure if you know it, but TI-89 has two different minus keys.
No, I didn't know that. That notation seems to be fairly new in calculators. Calculators have been distinguishing between the unary minus and binary subtraction operator for a long time, but using +- for the unary operation and - for subtraction.

I didn't realize that lurflurf was using (-) to mimic that key on the TI-89.
Borek said:
The one with "(-)" is an unary "change sign" operator, the other is a binary "minus". Hence the "(-)" and "-" notation is just reflecting the reality.
 
  • #10
Mark44 said:
No, I didn't know that. That notation seems to be fairly new in calculators. Calculators have been distinguishing between the unary minus and binary subtraction operator for a long time, but using +- for the unary operation and - for subtraction.

I didn't realize that lurflurf was using (-) to mimic that key on the TI-89.

The [(-)] key doesn't mimic a [+/-] key, it correctly implements the operation of negation in normal mathementical notation which is to negate the following argument, whereas the normal implementation of a [+/-] key is to negate the argument currently displayed.

Note that page 943(!) of the manual states:
To enter a negative number, press [(-)] followed by the number. Post operations and exponentiation are performed before negation. For example, the result of -x2 is a negative number, and -92 = -81.
 
  • #11
Now that I look at the picture of my TI, I think it is time to clean it :blushing:
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
17K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K