MHB How to Derive Answers Using N Formula

  • Thread starter Thread starter DYLAN4321
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derive
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving answers using a specific formula in Excel, with a focus on the variable T2 and its relation to Newtons (N). Participants highlight confusion regarding the absence of "N" in the equation and question the clarity of the formula's intended computation. The Newton-Raphson method is suggested as a potential solution approach, although its relevance to the quadratic nature of the equation is debated. Additionally, discrepancies in calculated values for T2 prompt further clarification on the formula's application. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for a clear understanding of the equation and its components for accurate implementation in Excel.
DYLAN4321
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have been given the attachment formula and asked to enter this into an excel spreadsheet. Although I am not entirely sure how the answer was derived. Is anyone able to explain step by step as I want to try and enter this into an excel spreadsheet. For reference N = Newtons
 

Attachments

  • equation.png
    equation.png
    5.7 KB · Views: 122
Mathematics news on Phys.org
DYLAN4321 said:
Hi,

I have been given the attachment formula and asked to enter this into an excel spreadsheet. Although I am not entirely sure how the answer was derived. Is anyone able to explain step by step as I want to try and enter this into an excel spreadsheet. For reference N = Newtons
I believe you were suggested to look up a solution method, the Newton-Raphson approximation being one method mentioned. Do you have a solution method you would like to use? Excel will not simply solve it for you.

-Dan
 
There is no "N" in the given equation so there can be no "N" in the answer! Have you left something out?
 
DYLAN4321 said:
I have been given the attachment formula and asked to enter this into an excel spreadsheet.
It is not clear what your Excel formula is supposed to compute: $$\frac{7134611197}{T_2^2}-T_2$$ for the given value of $T_2$, the value of $T_2$ for the given left-hand side of this equation or something else. Also, for $T_2=956$ we have $$\frac{7134611197}{T_2^2}-T_2\approx6850$$ and not $6863$.

topsquark said:
I believe you were suggested to look up a solution method, the Newton-Raphson approximation being one method mentioned.
Mentioned where? This is a quadratic equation in $T_2$.

HallsofIvy said:
There is no "N" in the given equation
N is the units in which $T_2$ is measured.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Mentioned where? This is a quadratic equation in $T_2$.
The OP also posted this on another site. Sorry, I should have included the link to it.

-Dan
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top