Simplify the following expression

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around simplifying a mathematical expression involving radicals and binomials. Participants explore the challenges of manipulating these expressions and question the validity of certain algebraic operations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the difficulty of simplifying the expression and the implications of taking square roots of binomials. Some express confusion over the equality of certain radical expressions and the need for a common denominator.

Discussion Status

There is ongoing exploration of different methods to simplify the expression, with some participants suggesting the use of common denominators and others questioning the feasibility of achieving a simpler form. Various interpretations of the problem are being considered, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the complexity of the problem, noting that it may not align with typical high school or first-year college expectations. There are references to non-linear equations and the use of advanced algebraic techniques, indicating a high level of difficulty.

tahayassen
Messages
269
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/88/71893688.png

Homework Equations



Not applicable.

The Attempt at a Solution



http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/846/14479081.png

I'm already stuck! I calculated both expressions and they don't equal each other. :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, don't bother helping me with this one. I think I've figured out. I needed to find the LCD between the two fractions.

Instead, answer this: why can't I take the square root of a binomial?

edit: I'm stuck again with this question. I can't seem to get rid of the large radical even after I combine the fractions. :(
 
You can't do that because generally,

[tex]\sqrt{a+b}\neq \sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}[/tex]

And if you want to see why, if these are equal, then their squares must be equal. Try squaring both sides and see what happens.

This is one of those problems that unless you know where you're going, it's going to be difficult finding your way there. I tried a few things out but I don't see the radicals being simplified. I believe the only way to simplify this expression is to take a common denominator and then take a factor of 4 in the denominator out of the larger surd.
 
Wolfram comes up with a nice one:
$$
\frac 1 2 \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 - \sqrt 3}}
$$

Beyond that I also believe there's not much that is useful to simplify.
 
I like Serena said:
Wolfram comes up with a nice one:
$$
\frac 1 2 \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 - \sqrt 3}}
$$

If you consider further nested roots as being simpler, then sure :-p

I made a futile attempt to see if the larger surd can be removed by trying to find if there exist integers a,b,c,d to the following equality:

[tex]\left(a+b\sqrt{2}+c\sqrt{3}+d\sqrt{6}\right)^2= \sqrt{6} -\sqrt{2}+4[/tex]

but to my amazement (not really, I was expecting it) to figure this out, one would need to solve these non-linear simultaneous equations:

[tex]a^2+2b^2+3c^2+6d^2=4[/tex]
[tex]ab+3cd=\frac{-1}{2}[/tex]
[tex]ac+2bd=0[/tex]
[tex]ad+bc=\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And I haven't a clue how to proceed - plus I'm not really feeling up for the challenge considering its pretty unlikely that the variables are all in fact integers.
 
Last edited:
Mentallic said:
If you consider further nested roots as being simpler, then sure

Less work to type into a calculator. :biggrin:
And it looks nice!


And I haven't a clue how to proceed - plus I'm not really feeling up for the challenge considering its pretty unlikely that the variables are all in fact integers.

Neither have I, but if you do proceed, please swap the signs of the 2nd and 4th line. ;)
 
I'm pretty sure there's no way to make that surd much simpler in any meaningful sense.
 
I like Serena said:
Less work to type into a calculator. :biggrin:
And it looks nice!
Agreed, it looks pretty sweet!


I like Serena said:
Neither have I, but if you do proceed, please swap the signs of the 2nd and 4th line. ;)

Uhh... How I managed to transcribe that incorrectly I'll never know
 
Mentallic said:
If you consider further nested roots as being simpler, then sure :-p

I made a futile attempt to see if the larger surd can be removed by trying to find if there exist integers a,b,c,d to the following equality:

[tex]\left(a+b\sqrt{2}+c\sqrt{3}+d\sqrt{6}\right)^2= \sqrt{6} -\sqrt{2}+4[/tex]

but to my amazement (not really, I was expecting it) to figure this out, one would need to solve these non-linear simultaneous equations:

[tex]a^2+2b^2+3c^2+4d^2=4[/tex]
[tex]ab+3cd=\frac{-1}{2}[/tex]
[tex]ac+2bd=0[/tex]
[tex]ad+bc=\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And I haven't a clue how to proceed - plus I'm not really feeling up for the challenge considering its pretty unlikely that the variables are all in fact integers.

Well, this is probably not what is wanted in high-school or first-year college, but one _can_ get a solution using Groebner bases. Here is what happens in Maple 14:
sys:={a^2+2*b^2+3*c^2+4*d^2-4,2*a*b+6*c*d+1,a*c+2*b*d,2*a*d+2*b*c-1};
with(Groebner);

B:=Basis(sys,plex(a,b,c,d));
B := [1-256*d^2+19072*d^4-626560*d^6+10231872*d^8-85606400*d^10+351143936*d^12-621502464*d^14+359817216*d^16,

58700876744*d-6772491730030*d^3+516306245937248*d^5-16676091040182256*d^7+214982693609933568*d^9-1128998897071871232*d^11+2264133466874087424*d^13-1391829359823378432*d^15+5466782401*a,

20794688424*d-25887729161344*d^3+1613081383661048*d^5-35738765248743936*d^7+355188616828494592*d^9-1606762324171226112*d^11+2991485535250916352*d^13-1775184867367059456*d^15+5466782401*b,

127738358584*d-36353540383530*d^3+2108143299164768*d^5-47032277980064368*d^7+476144844758761728*d^9-2186167800738890496*d^11+4105190085058529280*d^13-2446662083621640192*d^15+5466782401*c]

So, d is one of the roots of the 16th degree polynomial in B[1]; then we can get a, b and c by setting B[2], B[3] and B[4] to zero. See? Nothing to it!

RGV
 
  • #10
Well, all roots of B[1] appear to be irrational (according to Wolfram), so I don't think we get a nice simplification. ;)
 
  • #11
Look at various ways to express [itex]\displaystyle\cos\left(\frac{5\pi}{24}\right)\,,[/itex] and/or [itex]\displaystyle\sin\left(\frac{7\pi}{24}\right)\,.[/itex]
 
  • #12
Nice! However did you find that one?
 
  • #13
I like Serena said:
Nice! However did you find that one?
It reminded me of a problem I used to give students in which they were to find [itex]\displaystyle\sin\left(\frac{\pi}{12}\right)\,,[/itex] using both angle subtraction and half angle identities.

(I then had them give the approximate numerical answer to each -- mostly so they could see that the two different looking answers were equivalent.)

So I played around with that a bit for the problem in this thread.
 
  • #14
I went a little nuts with this problem and got...

[itex]\frac{(6(√6-√2)+24)\sqrt{6(√6-√2)+24}}{√48(6(√6-√2)+24)}[/itex]

Are radicals still considered nested if they're within parentheses?

edit: they would be since you could just distribute in the 6, oh well.
 
  • #15
Ray Vickson said:
Well, this is probably not what is wanted in high-school or first-year college, but one _can_ get a solution using Groebner bases. Here is what happens in Maple 14:
sys:={a^2+2*b^2+3*c^2+4*d^2-4,2*a*b+6*c*d+1,a*c+2*b*d,2*a*d+2*b*c-1};
with(Groebner);
Could you try this again but with
sys:={a^2+2*b^2+3*c^2+6*d^2-4,2*a*b+6*c*d+1,a*c+2*b*d,2*a*d+2*b*c-1};

Ray Vickson said:
So, d is one of the roots of the 16th degree polynomial in B[1]; then we can get a, b and c by setting B[2], B[3] and B[4] to zero. See? Nothing to it!
What a relief! :biggrin:
SammyS said:
Look at various ways to express [itex]\displaystyle\cos\left(\frac{5\pi}{24}\right)\,,[/itex] and/or [itex]\displaystyle\sin\left(\frac{7\pi}{24}\right)\,.[/itex]
Mentallic said:
This is one of those problems that unless you know where you're going, it's going to be difficult finding your way there.

Ahh yes that's where I remember seeing something similar to the expression [tex]\frac{\sqrt{6}-\sqrt{2}}{8}[/tex]
Thanks for reminding me.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K