Do this easy math problem for me real quick.

alpinecowboy84

alpinecowboy84

Active member
i'm taking quantitative anthropology (stats essentially) which is required for my major. in any case its been forever since i've done anything more complicated than division. i can't remember any of the rules according to square roots. so if you could please tell me what the answer to this question is and then if possible explain how you got there it would be appreciated

we'll just say that / means square root sign.

okay, the problem:

(solve for k) k = /y2(squared) - 4

because i know k does not equal (/y2) - 2, correct?

indie lovers unite! the independent music cult
 
so wait are you saying that its :

(solve for k) k = /y2(squared) - 4

as in

k=/Y(times)2(squared)-4

or

k=/(y2)^2-4

snap crackle pop
 
uhh, isn't it already solved for k?

I can't see any way of simplifying that. If it was a perfect square in the root, then you could get rid of the root. But it isn't.

I might be missing something really obvious. I'm not really that great at math.

_________________________________________

EVEN ON THE INTERNET, EVERYONE KNOWS YOU DIDN'T REALLY DRINK 36 BEERS IN ONE NIGHT.
 
If you want to solve for y:

k=√(y2-4)

k2=y2-4

k2-4=y2

so y=

y= √(k2-4)

Thats if you wanted to solve for y was it?

i wasnt sure.....

 
fuck i dont kno this is way to confusinggg

------Julian

M.A.M.S.P....NWFT(cause everyone else has it there)
 
k=/(y^2-4)

k=/[(y-2)(y+2)] (difference of two squares)

k^2=+or- [(y-2)(y+2)]

k^2=(y-2)(y+2)

or

k^2=-(y-2)(y+2) i don't know what you would do with this but thats your job, and i thinkthis is right

Let us have a revolution
 
you forgot that when you square both sides you have to do the + or - thing

Let us have a revolution
 
loud noises?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~***************~~~~~~~~~~~~

If it aint gorilla, it aint steeze

. I pulled down my pant and there was poop all over my underpants. I cried and cried and cried because my dad said i was "a god damn failure" - scientist

 
i love couch

french is wierd too. the movie "mouse hunt" in french was called " nous reveillons pas un souris qui dors" meaning we wont wake up a mouse thats sleeping.

-Lat
 
I don't think you can do anything past what he said. Factoring is the only obvious thing to do, but that doesn't give you two equivalent factors. You want to solve for k, but if you look, you already have what k is equivalent to and factoring would only make the problem more complex...so...I think you're stuck.

SkeeOrDie: I don't hate boarders, I hate fuckers, and 8-year olds that call everyone nigger face.
 
In your question up above did you mean the whole thing was square rooted? Because the way you wrote it, without brackets, makes it look like just the y^2 was square rooted. If that was the case, the square root and the square cancel out. However, I have a feeling you know this, but you have to write out the question right or else it gets confusing.

signatures are for pussies

 
do it urself u jew

-formally known as parkskiertmr

-had 800+ posts before being banned

-best known for thread about how running is not a sport
 
the answer is 1

what's up now bitch

"i see you have gotten the most recent pic of atlantaski and i must say he is looking pretty dark for a wigger"- Lats reply to a picture of a piece of shit in a toilet

ACLs suck
 
^impossible. you cant work on one side of the equation without doing the same on the other side. if you want to solve for k you already have your answer. y on the other hand i forget who but someone solved it and it looked right to me. it doesnt need a + and - because the equation is a square root. basicly solving for y is finding the inverse of the equation. well i guess technicly u need a + and - but you have to add that {k|k>(or equal to) i think it was -4?} i dont remember. but u have to include an inequality because that equation turned out as a full parabola. square root equations are only half the parabola

NS SKATEBOARD
 
Just so you know this is not hard math. Not saying your dumb, just saying in general and it is quite easily solveable. I actually just think you wrote it down wrong up there.

signatures are for pussies

 
if you are trying to solve for y then the one guy already said it,

or it could be written as y^2-k^2=4

wichic is the only other way you really would want the equation for, but that way wouldnt really be used for stat i dont think anyway

_________________________________________

www.ihateny.net
 
julian your just retarded as it is. you wont ever figure that out. stupid cannuck.

_____________________

There is a man, A certain man, And for the poll you may be sure that hell do all he can, who is this one whos favorite sign just by his action has attraction magnets on the run, who likes to smoke, enjoys a joke and wouldnt get
 
haah if its so easy why cant you do it?

-kulpy-

gangsta raps lyrics are all the same, Someone gets shot, someones frontin, someones a wangsta, someones benchpressin, someones makin fried chicken, and the beans dont burn on the grill. You can see that shit in kentucky. Fuck the bronx, deep south bitches-scientist
 
and this is why i dropped out of university. it's not that hard to do, but i hate thinking.

stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

-J. Harvie

~~Phunkin Phatt Phreerider~~

Capital City Rider, DFP

don't be a bucket head...
 
wait so, KY jelly + 2 people = fun!?

______________________________

"Looks like I'll be getting to work Ghandi steeze pretty soon." - AD1080

No Coast Productions
 
thats very hard

french is wierd too. the movie "mouse hunt" in french was called " nous reveillons pas un souris qui dors" meaning we wont wake up a mouse thats sleeping.

-Lat
 
Well yeah... (y^2-4) can be simplified... it's a difference of squares. Although if you want to solve for K... it's already solved. the only thing you can do is this:

k =

/ (y^2 - 4) =

/ (y-2) (y+2) = k

You can't get much simpler than that. Unless of cours you have k's value, in which case you know what to do.

What I did is a simple rule you are supposed to have learned in 10th grade: in a expression of second degree with a differnce of a squared variable (y, x, whatever), and of a natural number, you can simplify by assuming that the two factors are that variable (y or x) at the first degree less the natural number's square root for one and added to the square root for the other.

Difficult to explain on NS, but these examples should make it simple:

(x^2 - 4) = (x-2) * (x+2)

(y^2 - 49) = (y+7) * (y - 7)

(k^2 - 100) = (k+10) * (k- 10) = Easy to understand.

That problem seems a little simple. Are you sure it wasn't solve for y or for 4???

~~Phunkin Phatt Phreerider~~

Erm... yeah.
 
DUDE, YOU CAN'T DO THAT, ITS ALREADY simplified. That is the answer for k.

BATTLE RIDGE PRODUCTIONS

your steeze is like the antithesis of the gangsta-tanner-gorillasteeze junk... the type of skiing that says "Fuck groomed parks and rails, rip big mountain lines and throw backflips off everything-J.D. May
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top