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.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top