MHB Rationalize Numerator & Denominator

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathdad
  • Start date Start date
mathdad
Messages
1,280
Reaction score
0
1. Why must we rationalize the denominator?

2. Are fractions not allowed to have square roots in the denominator?

3. When is it necessary to rationalize the numerator?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
RTCNTC said:
1. Why must we rationalize the denominator?

2. Are fractions not allowed to have square roots in the denominator?

3. When is it necessary to rationalize the numerator?

Substantially, it is unnecessary. It may sometimes be called "convention".

Secondarily, never pass up an opportunity to get better at something useful through practice - even tedious practice.

Thirdly, Teachers and graders may require it. Comply, or get it wrong.

Fourthly, electronic grading systems may not recognize the answer, otherwise.

Fifthly, there are some significant digit issues and machine considerations. Division by an irrational number can be far more costly than division by an integer.

Convinced?
 
Thank you. When I took precalculus in 1993, the professor made a BIG DEAL about rationalizing the denominator, and the numerator of certain functions. Rationalizing can be tedious but I really enjoy the work. I was just curious as to why it is a big concern in math courses.
 
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...
Back
Top