Solving Fraction Addition with Denominators 33 and 48: Finding the LCD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holocene
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Factoring
AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about adding fractions with denominators 33 and 48, the correct least common denominator (LCD) was initially misidentified as 240. The confusion arose from a misunderstanding of the terms, as the correct denominators were later clarified to be 30 and 48, which indeed yield an LCD of 240. The prime factorizations were analyzed, confirming that the least common multiple (LCM) of 30 and 48 is 240. Participants emphasized the importance of distinguishing between the least common denominator and the greatest common divisor. Ultimately, the conversation highlighted the significance of accurately identifying denominators in fraction addition.
Holocene
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
In adding fractions with denominators of 33 and 48, the LCD is 240.

I don't understand any easy way to arrive at this number.

33 factors out to be : 3 * 11
48 factors out to be: 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 3

But from these numbers, none will yeild a product of 240.

What am I doing wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What is the LCD? Did you meand the GCD(Greatest Common Divisor)? Or did you mean the LCM(Least Common Multiple)? As far as I can tell you did nothing wrong, as 240 is neither the gcd nor the lcm of 33 and 48.

EDIT: Oh I guess you meant LCD as in Least Common Denominator, which would be equivalent in this case to the LCM, but still it shouldn't be 240, and you should be able to tell that from the prime factorizations of the three numbers.
 
Last edited:
My mistake!

The denominators of the fractions were 30 (not 33) and 48, and the LCD is in fact 240. I read the problem wrong!

30 = 2 * 3 * 5
48 = 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 3

2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 3 * 5 = 240

Thanks for help. I appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
LCD is is trivially 1 for all natural numbers.

What you are after is LCM, least common multiple.
 
Yes, arildno, he is looking for the least common multiple of the numbers he gave. He did, however, say initially that these were the denominators of given fractions and he was looking for the least common denominator of those fractions.
 
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