MHB Exponents and Variable Equalities

  • Thread starter Thread starter RidiculousName
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponents Variable
RidiculousName
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I am not sure how to figure this out. Basically, I know XN + XN = 2XN and that 2N + 2N = 2N+1. So, since 2 * 2 = 4 why doesn't 2N+1 = (2 * 2)N = 4N?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Why did you put the brackets there? Then you have to distribute N over both twos, which is not what you started out with.
 
greg1313 said:
Why did you put the brackets there? Then you have to distribute N over both twos, which is not what you started out with.

Sorry, I am terrible with the syntax of math. How would I indicate that the 2s should be multiplied before the exponent is applied? (2(2))N?
 
(2 * 2)$^\text{N}$

Is this part of a problem you're working on? If so, please post it and I'll be better equipped to help. :)
 
RidiculousName said:
2N+1 = (2 * 2)N = 4N?
[math]2^{N + 1} = 2 \cdot 2^N \neq 4^N[/math]

-Dan
 
greg1313 said:
(2 * 2)$^\text{N}$

Is this part of a problem you're working on? If so, please post it and I'll be better equipped to help. :)

I'm not really working on a problem. I'm just trying to figure out why it doesn't fit. I want to know the concepts behind the numbers here.

- - - Updated - - -

topsquark said:
[math]2^{N + 1} = 2 \cdot 2^N \neq 4^N[/math]

-Dan

Thank you. I think I've got it. Basically in 2XN the exponent is applied first. So that's why 2N + 2N = 2N+1 but not 4N
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top