MHB Exponents and Variable Equalities

  • Thread starter Thread starter RidiculousName
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponents Variable
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the rules of exponents and variable equalities, specifically the expression 2N + 2N and its relation to 4N. It clarifies that 2N + 2N equals 2^(N + 1), not 4N, because the exponent applies to the base of 2 rather than the product of two twos. Participants discuss the correct notation for indicating multiplication before applying the exponent, with suggestions like (2 * 2)^N. Ultimately, the conclusion is that the exponent is applied first in the expression, which resolves the confusion. Understanding these concepts is crucial for correctly manipulating expressions involving exponents.
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
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top