Simplifying surds as numerators

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MattVonFat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simplifying
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on simplifying surds, specifically the expression √3/2. Participants clarify that while both √3/2 and 1/2*√3 are equivalent, the common practice is to eliminate roots from denominators for clarity. The rationale behind this simplification is to maintain a standard form in mathematical expressions, where numerators can contain roots but denominators should not. The example provided illustrates the algebraic manipulation involved in simplifying such expressions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of surds and their properties
  • Familiarity with basic algebraic manipulation
  • Knowledge of fractions and their simplification
  • Concept of rationalizing denominators
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the process of rationalizing denominators in algebra
  • Learn about the properties of surds and their simplification
  • Explore advanced fraction simplification techniques
  • Review examples of algebraic expressions involving surds
USEFUL FOR

Students, educators, and anyone interested in mastering algebraic simplification techniques, particularly those involving surds and fractions.

MattVonFat
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I was reading about surds and saw this:

[PLAIN]http://www.mattvonfat.com/eq.png

I'm probably not as familiar with simplifying fractions as I should be but I think I get that it's being split into two fractions and that √3/2 is the same as 1/2*√3 but I don't understand what's actually being done to √3/2 to simplify it and why the original expression isn't left as it is.

Any help would be much appreciated!

Thanks,
Matt
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Nothing wrong with either form of the expression.
Usually we eliminate roots from denominators.
Numerators with roots are fine.
 
it might help to think of it like this:

2/3 - 1/3 = (2-1)/3

So reverse would be the same:

(2-1)/3 = 2/3 - 1/3

if 3 were negative, then the negatives would evaluate:

(2-1)/-3 = 2/-3 - 1/-3 = -2/3 - (-1/3) = -2/3 + 1/3
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K