Mathematics desk
< June 16	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 17[edit]

Arithmetic[edit]

shanu 07:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Suppose than x,y,z are real numbers not equal to zero. a & b are two negative real nos. Is it always possible to find another real no. c such that x^a + y^b = z^c . For example consider 2^-1 + 3^-1 = 1.2^-1 . I am thinking of this because fermat's last theorem doesen't allows it for natural nos. greater than 2.

For any given x, y, a and b values the left side of your equation is some constant value: v = x^a + y^b. Then the equation v = z^c with given z has a solution defined by logarithm: c = log_zv = log v / log z. --CiaPan (talk) 07:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cube Root[edit]

How can we find cube root of any no. ,like 2 without using calculator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohit max (talk • contribs) 07:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We can use a paper and a pencil. Possibly Tables of logarithms, too... --CiaPan (talk) 08:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Without a log table it's a little harder. A good way to do it would be to start at some estimate

x_{0}

and repeatedly iterate

x_{n+1}={\frac {2}{3}}x_{n}+{\frac {a}{3x_{n}^{2}}}

. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 08:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this will also be interesting. Not very effective for pen and paper, though. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, there are a couple of "paper and pencil" algorithms for finding cube roots. This is one example (haven't checked it out, to be honest). Pallida Mors 01:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The simplest way is by the bisection method. Of course, if you actually mean *any* number, you'd have to consider calculating sines and cosines as well...--Fangz (talk) 01:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-3^2 = ?[edit]

I brain farted with the initial question, asking 9^9. This is why Meni answered 'wrongly' - it's my fault -- 88.217.28.51 (talk) 08:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

-3^2 = 9

vs

-3^2 = -9

Which is correct? We can't agree, so I am asking here.. -- 88.217.28.51 (talk) 08:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Order of operations. Exponentiation takes precedence over negation. Thus to evaluate -9^2, we first replace 9^2 with 81, giving -81. Thus -9^2 = -81. If we wanted to do the negation first, we would use parentheses: (-9)^2 = (-9)*(-9) = 81. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 08:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^ vs **[edit]

Now, they claim that ^ (not the XOR kind) and ** are different operators. Opinions on that one? -- 88.217.28.51 (talk) 10:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the context? In what way do "they" claim the operators are different? ** is not used in mathematical writing, only in some programming languages. Some languages use ^ to mean exponentiation, and some use **. I do not know of any other difference. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 10:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly. Thanks -- 88.217.28.51 (talk) 10:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only language I know of that distinguishes between them is Haskell. ^ raises any number to an non-negative integer power (thus the result can have the same type as the base even in the case of integers, and it can be computed by repeated multiplication). ** raises numbers to floating-point powers and gives a floating-point result (in this case we can make no guarantee about whether the result is an integer or even rational, and we have to use a different algorithm to calculate the value). --Taejo|대조 11:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also Exponentiation#Exponentiation in programming languages. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Python is another example. ** is exponentiation and ^ is XOR. Dragons flight (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OP said "not the XOR kind" --Taejo|대조 17:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]