Is Distributing or Using FOIL Better for Expanding (5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thomas576
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the best method for expanding the expression (5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1). It emphasizes that while FOIL can be applied, a more effective approach is to use distribution, especially when dealing with polynomials that have multiple terms. Participants clarify that the correct expansion results in 125t^3 - 1, and they illustrate how to derive coefficients for each term accurately. The conversation also highlights that FOIL is not inherently flawed but can become complicated with more terms, suggesting a systematic distribution method for clarity. Ultimately, mastering distribution is recommended for better polynomial multiplication.
thomas576
Messages
20
Reaction score
1
(5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1)
i just distributed 5t-1 thought the 2nd part and got?

this right way to do it?



125t^3-1 + 25t^2-1 + 5t
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No; it is totally wrong.
Do you understand what you are supposed to be doing?

If a,b,c are numbers, then we have the rule:
a*(b+c)=a*b+a*c
Does this rule seem weird to you?
Or can you think of examples in the real world where you use multiplication and where that rule ought naturally to hold?
 
You can't just do that. Let's examine it a more efficient way than you might have learned. We want to expand

(5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1).

Examine the coefficients of each power of t when you multiply it out: to get t^3, we have to multiply t^2 with t. The only way we can do that is (5t)(25t^2), so the coefficient of t^3 is 5(25)=125. Now consider the coefficient on t^2. To get t^2, we either have to multiply t^2 with a constant, or t by itself. The only ways we can do that here are 25t^2(-1) and (5t)(5t), so the coefficient on t^2 is 25(-1)+(5)(5)=0.

Using a similar process for the coefficients of t and t^0, you find that the expansion is just

125t^3 - 1.
 
Last edited:
thomas576 said:
(5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1)
i just distributed 5t-1 thought the 2nd part and got?

this right way to do it?



125t^3-1 + 25t^2-1 + 5t
No.

If you're distributing it, then you really have:

25t^2(5t-1) + 5t (5t-1) + 1 (5t - 1)
(25t^2*5t - 25t^2*1) + (5t*5t - 5t*1) + (1*5t - 1*1)
125t^3 - 25t^2 + 25t^2 - 5t + 5t - 1
125t^3 -1

FOIL only works as a memory aid for multiplying polynomials with two terms each:

(a + b)(c + d) = ac + ad + bc + bd

You can kind of do the same thing with what you have. You're multiplying the first term of the first polynomial (a) by each of the terms in the second polynomial, then the second term by each of the second polynomial terms.

5t*25t^2 + 5t*5t + 5t*1 - 1*25t^2 - 1*5t - 1*1
 
thomas576 said:
(5t-1)(25t^2+5t+1)
i just distributed 5t-1 thought the 2nd part and got?

this right way to do it?

125t^3-1 + 25t^2-1 + 5t

There are several ways to do this correctly, as others have shown. I just want to make it clear that FOIL could be used here if you applied it correctly, but I recommend you start thinking in terms of distribution the way BobG did it. As he said, to use FOIL you have to have two groups of two, but each one part of those twos can contain multiple terms.

(5t-1)(25t^2 + 5t + 1)

(5t-1)[(25t^2 + 5t) + 1]

------F---------O--------I---------L
5t(25t^2 + 5t) + 5t*1 - 1*(25t^2 + 5t) -1

125t^3 + 25t^2 + 5t - 25t^2 - 5t -1

125t^3 -1

There is no advantage to doing it this way, but it illustrates that FOIL is not "broken" when you have multiple terms, it just gets more complicated in its application.

FOIL is just an extension of the distributive law to cases where the single term in a simple distribution is replaced by a split term.

A(c + d) = Ac + Ad

If A = (a + b) this is

(a + b)(c + d) = (a + b)c + (a + b)d

(a + b)(c + d) = ac + bc + ad + bd

This result is in the order FIOL, but who can remember a silly thing like FIOL, so somebody decided to reverse the order of the inner two terms and make it FOIL. You will always be able to keep things straight if you develop an orderly distribution approach of multiplying the potentially complicated first factor (i.e., first thing in parentheses) times each term in the potentially complicated second factor, and then distribute a second time across the first factor for each term created. This is exactly what BobG did. It is an excellent model to follow. When you become more proficient, you might want to adopt Data's method because that keeps like-powered terms arranged together which makes simplifying easier.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top