Does /B/ know
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Does /B/ know
>>685981988
x = 6
>>685981988
six
ask wolfram alpha
>>685981988
answer is x=666
4x+1 = 25
4x = 24
x = 6
>>685981988
=> √(4x+1)=5
=> 4x+1=25
=> x=6
>>685981988
sqrt(4x+1)-5=0 /^2
4x+1-25=0
4x=24 /:4
x=6
>>685981988
How dumb you have to be so you need ask /b/ for help w/ homeworks...enjoy your wellfare dumass
>>685981988
Are you fucking retarded? Go home schoolboy.
>>685981988
6 you nigger
>>685981988
4x + 1 + 25 = 0
4x + 26 = 0
4x = -26
x = -26/4
x = -6.5
6
Next.
>>685982470
-5 squared is 25.
>>685983183
app?
>>685982437
How the fuck do you get 25?
>>685983626
photomath
>>685983718
Add the 5 to the other side, then square it to get rid of the root.
>>685983718
are you that stupid or what?
>>685982470
you are mentally retarded (a-b)^2 = a^2 -2ab +b^2
firtst you shoud do sqrt(4x+1)=5 and than multiply
>>685983718
5^2
Do you even math?
>>685983889
No, you just don't know math.
>>685983054
Really?
>>685981988
IIIIII
>>685983889
(a-b)^(1/2) not (a-b)^2 i.e. the 1/2 will just go away once you put it to the power of 2.
>>685984014
It's -5^2.
Which makes 25.
Which means you subtract it from the other side.
-25.
is /b/ really tat dumb they can't figure out that X= -0
>>685981988
/4x+1-5=0
/4x-4=0
/4x=4
2x=4
2x/2=4/2
X=2
AWNSER IS X=2
>>685984283
Fuck this. I am writing it on paper
>>685981988
/4x+1=5
4x+1=25
4x = 24
x = 6
I dunno.
>>685981988
sqrt4x+1-5=0
add 5 to both sides
sqrt4x+1=5
x=6
6x4=24
24+1=25
sqrt of 25 = 5
5=5
>>685981988
6, any other answer in this thread is obviously b8
also check my 6
>>685981988
fucking retards, x=1
>>685984283
>>685984554
>>685984758
>>685984990
/thread
>>685984134
Yup. PEMDAS. In this case:
Exponent. Square everything to get.
4x +1 + 25 = 0
Add to get.
4x + 26 = 0
Get x to one side by subtracting 26 from bother sides.
4x = -26
Then divide to get x by itself.
x = -26/4
Why are you idiots doing this childs homework for him?
>>685984758
Order of operations says you do exponents first.
>>685984990
that's not on paper you liar, that is clearly a screen shot. i'm unsubscribing
>>685981988
x=6
Also, just because we can do something interesting:
√(1+4*6)=5
=> √(1+4(1+5))=5
=> √(5+4*5)=5
=> 5=√(5+4√(5+4*5))
=> 5=√(5+4√(5+4√(5+4*5)))
.
.
.
=> 5=√(5+4√(5+4√(5+4√(5+4√(5+4√(5+4...))))))
>>685985707
still got the right answer, doesnt really make a difference
>>685985700
Yes, I've got no better thing to do.
>>685985711
I couldn't be bothered to find this thread on my phone bro.
>>685985451
Yeah Cauchy and Schwartz didn't know what they were talking about, fuck their inequality, and fuck Young too.
You cannot square added terms individually.
>>685985979
This is a common problem on 7th grade :)
>>685984990
/4x + 1\ - 5 = 0
/4x + 1\ = 5
4x + 1 = 5^2
4x + 1 = 25
4x = 25 - 1
4x = 24
x = 24/4
x = 6
-x = -6
xxx = 666
>>685985719
How is that interdasting?
>>685986595
Because nested radicals are fun.
>>685986685
found the math nerd. This is why I am more of a chemistry guy.
>>685986685
Excuse my ignorance, what is a nested radical and what can they be used for?
>>685986876
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_root
>>685985850
It does.
Because if you do exponents first you get -5^2 which makes +25 then subtract to the other side.
But if you add 5 to both sides first you get a completely different, wrong answer.
>>685987209
not to mention that if your process is wrong it's gonna be zero points on a test
>>685987079
nested radical and nth-root is not the same
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_radical
this is fucking 7th grade math anon.shame
>>685981988
>Anonymous
√(4x+1)=5
4x+1=25
4x=24
x=6
>>685981988
X=1 it took me 17 seconds in my head
x=6
>>685983718
Did you drop out of highschool?
>>685987209
>>685985850
Imagine Sqrt(4x+1) + x - 5 = 0
You cant do exponents 1st now.
Sqrt(4x+1) = 5 - x
4x + 1 = 25 - 10x +x^2
>>685985719
lol
>>685987744
dubs speaks truth.
>>685987079
Thanks. Haven't done A level maths for 15 years, so hurts my brain.
I used Gassman equations in Geophysics (again a while ago) always found these very interesting as a real world application
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gassmann%27s_equation
>>685987490
But radical is, no?
>>685987983
>Gassmann
Its german for fart man
>>685988172
How's that job at McDonalds working out for you?
>>685986876
Nested radicals are something that came out of pure mathematics and were brought into focus primarily by the work of Ramanujan.
The ability to create finitely nested radicals were first discovered but not heavily studied when Cardano tried to solve the cubic equation. The Wikipedia example of √(3+2√(2))=1+√(2) is pretty good example of this. These are useful because this method of reduction simplifies the result.
Infinitely nested radicals on the other hand are useful as they can be used to find iterative solutions and they have a strong relation to Galois representations (part of Galois theory).
Some nested radicals are also a bit harder to solve, unlike that other one I made.
http://www.isibang.ac.in/~sury/ramanujanday.pdf
>>685987079
No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_radical
Although it is worth mentioning that you can create nested expressions with nth roots as well.
>>685987983
I've never worked with Grassman's equations. But I have looked at spherical harmonics in geophysics.
>>685984502
Are you stupid? I mean you are showing severe signs of stupid
sqrt(4x+1) = 5
4x+1 = sqr(5)
4x = 24
x = 24/4
x = 6
high school freshman level
Are you dumb
>>685988294
I dont work, 100% NEET. Work is for the slave caste
>>685988413
wat? I did this in 8th grade
>>685988413
>4x+1 = sqr(5)
>4x = 24
That is not possible
>>685988413
To be fair, I didn't learn this until 11th grade, but my school us the 2nd shittiest in the district.
ITT: we solve a kids homework
>>685989287
are you retarded? put a 4x = 25 - 1 in between
>>685989111
OK, Fartman!
As a slightly older anon, and hopefully wiser, I'd advise you to change that view and seek out work that makes you happy. Work gives you confidence, self respect and self esteem. Not depending on the state or people around for financial support would make a huge difference in your life, shit, it may even make you happy...
>>685989219
Different school systems.
>>685989506
kek
maybe some anon could ask somewhat really challenging
Seeing this while studying non-homogeneous second-order linear ordinary differential equations. Ah, good old times..
>>685989890
Do you want a challenging problem?
>>685989219
>>685989406
Ok, I honestly don't remember when i learned it. I also don't remember what I had for lunch yesterday. Is this caused by smoking weed?
>>685989890
a part of graduate engineers entrance exam. Not really that hard but it's something
>>685988413
That's... that's not possible.....
>>685990135
as long as it's not on the list of Millennium Prize Problems
>>685985707
But there's an unknown variable.....
>>685990406
kk
Give me a moment to format it.
I believe it's:
x=6
4(6)+1=25
Square Root of 25 is 5
5-5= 0
Call me out if I'm wrong but I think that's it.
>>685985451
You can't do it that way. You don't square individual terms.
>√(4x+1) - 5 = 0
The way you're trying to do it:
>(√(4x+1) - 5)^2 = 0^2
>(4x+1) - 10√(4x+1) + 25 = 0
Don't feel like doing the rest because it's a fucking retarded way to do it.
x=6
>>685990406
This is a number theory problem.
Let p(n) count the number of partitions of a non-negative integer n. Let σ(n) be the sum of divisors of n, with σ(0)=0.
Prove pic related.
>>685990232
2pi is 360* right?
How about this?
>>685981988
√4x+1 - 5 = 0
√4x+√1-√5 = 0
2x + 0 -2,5 = 0
-0,5x = 0
x = 0,5
easy
>>685981988
who is this /B/?
>>685981988
oh for fuck's sake if you remove a square root you gotta put the number between modules ("|4x + 1|")
jesus
add 5
square both sides
subtract one from both sides
divide by 4
your left with
x=2/3 or 4/6
>>685991146
I guess the proof uses induction
P(1)=1
1/1 * (p(1-0)*1 + p(0)*0)= 1
>>685990887
this!
>>685991296
correct
>>685990406
>>685991258
so x will be 226 am I right?
also could you teach me question b as we haven't done that in C2
>>685991258
Radians to degrees? Yes.
Also the answers are here.
>>685991968
The proof I used to do it uses generating functions.
But if you want to try it by induction then go for it, although I think the inductive step will be very messy.
>>685983054
You're retarded
>>685992168
thanks
>>685991947
Fuck you're dumb. How do you get the process right but the simple math wrong
>>685981988
>/B/
Fuck off, newshit.
>>685991968
>>685992179
p(n+1) = 1/(n+1) * sum (p(n+1-k)o(k),k,0,n+1)
= 1/(n+1) * ( sum(p(n+1-k)o(k),k,0,n) + p(0)o(0) )
I dont know if I could work out p(n+1-k). I never had number theory. Generating functions sounds more useful.
>>685983054
kek
>>685992947
Just writing it out like that doesn't finish the inductive step. The inductive step needs to be extremely clear.
I can give you a hint with pic related though, consider the logarithmic derivative of Q(t). And use what is called a Lambert series to deal with a type of series that will arise that you may have never seen before.
>>685993513
I'm well aware of that, but I don't know how to continue
>>685983718
>>685984283
>>685993779
I don't even know how to start :(
>>685985719
Huh, neat!
Here is a calc problem. m and n are positive integers, and Γ(t) is the gamma function. And lastly if the binomial coefficients have goofy arguments consider replacing the factorials with the gamma function and take a one sided limit to see that it is 0.
>>685993779
Try Cauchy convolution.
Now... Here is the problem!!!
>>685994317
what is Cauchy convolution? Cauchy product?
>>685995750
Yeah, Cauchy convolution and the Cauchy product are the same thing.
>>685994171
Here are some more if you want.
http://gauravtiwari.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ramanujan_update_1310.pdf
Pages 13 to 20 could be of interest.
x=6
>>685994317
well, changing the right side into gamma functions, gives you exactly the same term as left side. Only with k instead of t.
What's left is to proof
integral ( term(t) , t, -inf, inf) = sum ( term(k), k, -inf, inf)
>>685997128
>well, changing the right side into gamma functions, gives you exactly the same term as left side
This is incorrect.
Try graphing the integrand to see why.
All you need to know is the square of 5, Kys
The seventh graders I tutor do harder algebra than this you fucking dipshit
X = the last digit of my post
>>685998175
+ 1
>>685987325
he got the right answer so he would get points
>>685982488
Learn to spell you cuck
>>685997255
I'm not sure what you mean.
bino(n,k)*bino(m,k) = g(n+1)/ ( g(k+1)*g(n-k+1) ) * g(m+1)/ ( g(k+1)*g(m-k+1) )
sum( bino(n,k)*bino(m,k) , k , Z)
= sum( g(n+1) * g(m+1) / ( g(k+1)^2 * g(n-k+1) *g(m-k+1)), k, Z)
nothing happend so far
>>685990232
Aiotko päästä aaltoon vai
>>685981988
Underage fag spotted
>>685999240
This is what I mean.
Try this on: https://www.desmos.com/calculator
>>685981988
MODS
>>685999823
Forgot to make m and n dicrete, but you get the idea.
You can't just switch out the functions because one curve is continuous.
>this tread
Why americans are so bad in math? Even me, a black guy from third world, can resolve it mentaly.
Sorry about my bad english.
√(4X+1)-5=0
√(4X+1)=5
(√(4X+1))^2=5^2
4X+1=25
4X=24
X=24/4
X=6
>>686000047
And some parts of it are negative.
tl;dr there are lots of reasons you can't just do a replacement.
>>685989287
Yes it is.... retard the answer is 6
>>686000263
This.
Easy
Satanic trips get
Also,x=6
>>685983238
anon are you high?
>>686000263
>√(4X+1)-5=0
>√(4X+1)=5
>(√(4X+1))^2=5^2
>4X+1=25
>4X=24
>X=24/4
>X=6
Correct, basic math.
Also, nice dubs
>>685981988
x = 2
>>686000047
You mean that I cannot change the right side into gamma functions? Why not?
n! = gamma(n+1). The right side sums only over whole numbers. It doesn't change anything.
>>686000786
(-5)^2=-5*-5=25
He's high on math skillls biatch, hes right
>√(4X+1)-5=0
>√(4X+1)=5
>(√(4X+1))^2=5^2
>4X+1=25
>4X=24
>X=24/4
>X=6
Dis is true my nigga
>>686001008
I need to sleep, you right
>>686000873
Wrong
>>686001187
Aight nigga sleep tight
>>686001311
Nice dubs anon
>>685985451
that's retarded
>>686000943
cont
Also´, still I need to prove
integral ( term(t) , t, R) = sum ( term(k), k, Z)
and I had hoped for a neat property of the gamma function solve this.
>>686001336
In your calculation the splitting of the sqrt is wrong. That is where you made a mistake. That's not how you split up sqrt funxctions
>>686001488
Nice dubs
>>686000943
>It doesn't change anything.
Yeah, but it's also not a proof. The sum is over Z and the integral is over R. Sorry if I'm not explaining this well, it's just that this is extremely basic and I can't really wrap my head around what the issue your having is.
In the image I made the sum is the blue region and the integrand is the black/orange area.
Also, pic related is worth noting. As in general it is false, and in this case it is false.
>>686001910
Forgot pic.
>>686001910
>and in this case it is false
Shit I'm really tired.
It's bad logic.
>>685981988
Potato>>685982166
>>686001910
I never claimed it's a whole proof. Its only a step in my thought process.
>>686002185
>Its only a step in my thought process.
Well, it's wrong.
Try replacing the integrand and the term in the sum with some other function to see why it's bad logic.
>>686002107
its 23pm for me too
All you people who don't get x=6 are retarded, fill in x=0,5 for example and you will get √(4*0,5+1)-5=0, which gets us √3-5=0 which is false. Also, the square root of 4x is not 2x, its 2√x, or 2*√x
>>685981988
x = +-6
>>686002362
please tell me what is wrong in >>685999240
in my opinions, it doesn't changes anything in the sum
>>686002662
>it doesn't changes anything in the sum
Do you see the curve I posted in >>686000047?
>>685981988
6
too easy
>>686002662
>in my opinions
Math doesn't care about opinions. If what you're doing was okay then pic related would be true as well.
Here the integral is 1/2 and the sum is roughly 0.4195.
>>685982166
Underrated.
>>686003501
I never claimed that
>>686003854
I see where you are going now. Sorry about that, I thought that you were going to be saying something very different. You re just saying pic related.
Although pic related is true here, it doesn't end up being helpful.
>>686004566
Woops, k should be an m.
>>686004566
yes, I only did algebra on the right side. but now I'm totally confused if
bino(n,k) = n!/(k!*(n-k)!) = g(n+1)/ ( g(k+1)*g(n-k+1) )
holdes true for negative arguments
yeah it's maybe useles, but as I said I was hoping for a property of the gamma function the makes this trivial to prove.
>>686005349
cont
it's been 3 years since I did this stuff. I'm really out of training.
Thanks for it. Good night.
>>686005349
>I said I was hoping for a property of the gamma function the makes this trivial to prove
Sadly there isn't an identity for the gamams in the sum to help, but there is one for those in the integral.
The solution I made requires making an interpolating function for a continuous binomial coefficient under the integrand (using the reflection formula and a finite polynomial product) then it needs lots of partial fraction decomposition..
>but now I'm totally confused if
>bino(n,k) = n!/(k!*(n-k)!) = g(n+1)/ ( g(k+1)*g(n-k+1) )
>holdes true for negative arguments
The gamma function isn't defined for 0 or negative numbers but you can always play around with the limiting behavior to see what happens.
>>685985451
you squared it wrong though
>>685990219
I knew that something like (2^.5)(2^.5) comes out to be 2 and then I could use 2^.5 to do the opposite, I just didn't know how to do it with polynomials. I would've done (1+x)^2 as 1^2 + 2^2
>>685981988
tiger-algebra.com/drill/sqrt(4x_1)-5=0/
>>686006953
/thread
