Wrong Answer From Calculator for x^2-1 (all over) x+4

  • Thread starter Thread starter alliecr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculator
alliecr
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I am not getting the answer that my calculator is giving me for the following:

Find the following values for x^2-1 (all over) x+4

f(2a-1)

I am getting 4a^2 (all over) 2a+3 for my final answer and my calculator is getting (2a-1)^2-1 (all over) 2a+3.

What did I do wrong? Also, how do you work the math latex references?
these:
[x[2]^{}[/tex]-1]\frac{}{}[/x+4]
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
funny. I got x-4+(15)/(x+4)
 
Hydrargyrum said:
funny. I got x-4+(15)/(x+4)
Since the answer must have "a" rather that "x" that's not particularly funny!

alliecr said:
I am not getting the answer that my calculator is giving me for the following:

Find the following values for x^2-1 (all over) x+4

f(2a-1)

I am getting 4a^2 (all over) 2a+3 for my final answer and my calculator is getting (2a-1)^2-1 (all over) 2a+3.
Okay, if x= 2a- 1, then x2= (2a-1)2= 4a2- 4a+ 1 so x2- 1= 4a2- 4a. How did you get "4a2"? Also x+ 4= (2a-1)+ 4= 2a+ 3. You have
\frac{4a^2- 4a+ 1}{2a+ 3}[/ite]<br /> <br /> <blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-content"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent "> What did I do wrong? Also, how do you work the math latex references?<br /> these:<br /> [x[2]^{} </div> </div> </blockquote>
-1]\frac{}{}[/x+4]
The [/tex] only ends a latex code. You need in front. Did you know that you can see the code for a latex formula by clicking on it?
 
HallsofIvy said:
Since the answer must have "a" rather that "x" that's not particularly funny!


Okay, if x= 2a- 1, then x2= (2a-1)2= 4a2- 4a+ 1 so x2- 1= 4a2- 4a. How did you get "4a2"? Also x+ 4= (2a-1)+ 4= 2a+ 3. You have
\frac{4a^2- 4a+ 1}{2a+ 3}[/ite]<br /> <br /> <br /> The only ends a latex code. You need in front. Did you know that you can see the code for a latex formula by clicking on it?
<br /> <br /> Where does the+1 come from? I had this before I got my answer: 4a^{2}-2a-2a+1-1...the ones would cancel out right?
 
f(x) = \frac{x^2-1}{x+4}
If x = 2a - 1 then we have:
f(2a-1) = \frac{(2a-1)^2-1}{(2a-1) + 4} = \frac{(4a^2 - 4a +1) -1}{2a +3} = \frac{4a^2 - 4a}{2a +3}

You could end here or factor out the 4a on the numerator if you really wanted to.
\frac{4a(a - 1)}{2a+3}
 
alliecr said:
Where does the+1 come from? I had this before I got my answer: 4a^{2}-2a-2a+1-1...the ones would cancel out right?
<br /> Yes, and I showed that it did. I said (2a-1)<sup>2</sup>= 4a<sup>2</sup>- 4a+ 1 so (2a-1)<sup>2</sup>+ 1= 4a<sup>2</sup>- 4a just as you have now and just as I had before. But 4a<sup>2</sup>- 4a is NOT the 4a<sup>2</sup> you had before!
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top