MHB Find the Total Cost for X Cards Bought | Help Writing an Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Colt1229
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Writing
AI Thread Summary
To find the total cost for X cards bought, the first card costs 60 units, and each subsequent card increases by 20 units. The price of the nth card can be expressed as 60 + (n-1) * 20, which simplifies to 40 + 20n. The total cost for X cards can be calculated using the summation formula ∑(40 + 20n) from n=1 to X. This approach allows for a quick calculation without needing to add each card's price individually.
Colt1229
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Every time you buy a card the price goes up 20 units. The first card costs 60 units. How would you write an equation to find the TOTAL cost for X cards bought? I know how to get a price of an individual card by using the equation f(x)=20X+40. How would I write an equation that would add up the answers of f(x). I do not want to have to do it the long way.
The 1st card costs 60
2nd card costs 80
3rd costs 100
So the total cost for 3 cards is 240.
I do not know how to turn it into an equation though. If I wanted to go to 60 cards it would take forever.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Colt1229 said:
Every time you buy a card the price goes up 20 units. The first card costs 60 units. How would you write an equation to find the TOTAL cost for X cards bought? I know how to get a price of an individual card by using the equation f(x)=20X+40. How would I write an equation that would add up the answers of f(x). I do not want to have to do it the long way.
The 1st card costs 60
2nd card costs 80
3rd costs 100
So the total cost for 3 cards is 240.
I do not know how to turn it into an equation though. If I wanted to go to 60 cards it would take forever.
The $1^{st}$ card costs 60
$2^{nd}$ card costs 80
the $n^{th}$ card costs 60 + (n-1) * 20 = 40 + 20n

so total cost = $\sum_{n= 1}^{X}(40+20n)$

you should be able to proceed
 
Last edited:
kaliprasad said:
The $1^{st}$ card costs 60
$2^{nd}$ card costs 80
the $n^{th}$ card costs 60 + (n-1) * 20 = 40 * 20n

so total cost = $\sum_{n= 1}^{X}(40+2n)$

you should be able to proceed

Not to sound rude, since i am asking for help. However, I do not think that 60+ (n-1)*20 is equal to 40*20n.

60+(n-1)*20 does however equal 40+20n. Also, I do not understand how you got \sum_{n=1}^{X}(40+2n). Well really I don't understand where the (40+2n) comes from. Thank you for helping me though!
 
Colt1229 said:
Not to sound rude, since i am asking for help. However, I do not think that 60+ (n-1)*20 is equal to 40*20n.

60+(n-1)*20 does however equal 40+20n. Also, I do not understand how you got \sum_{n=1}^{X}(40+2n). Well really I don't understand where the (40+2n) comes from. Thank you for helping me though!

Thanks. It was a mistake on my part 40 + 20n in place of 40* 2n.

now we have found the cost of $n^{th}$ item and we need to add the cost from 1st to X and hence the sum.
 
Thank you very much. You were a great help. I just needed a memory refresh because its been so long.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top