The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by DJMayes
What problem is this? Based on that line it sounds very familiar to a STEP question I've seen before.

Check joostan's post above :smile:

He gave another hint about thinking of factorising x, y, z into primes or something so that's the approach I'm trying :s-smilie:
Original post by Robbie242
My attempt:

Spoiler



and then I'm stuck any advice felix?


I disagree with your last part.

Spoiler

Original post by Zaphod77
I disagree with your last part.

Spoiler



Ah yeah definitely my bad!
Original post by joostan
...


Have I missed something in the question? It seems fairly straightforward...

Spoiler

Original post by joostan
There's a solution above if you're tempted :tongue:
Hint:

Spoiler



I have got here but I'm kinda stuck on what to do next, I noticed 4 is not a prime number so I can't exploit the same method I used for for the cube root, 2 is a square number, perhaps this is important>?
My attempt:

Spoiler

(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Robbie242
I have got here but I'm kinda stuck on what to do next, I noticed 4 is not a prime number so I can't exploit the same method I used for for the cube root, 2 is a square number, perhaps this is important>?

My attempt:

Spoiler



Some of your working is not true. After the bold I recommend you take a look :smile:
EDIT: Ignore that - missed the 2 undeneath :tongue: That doesn't seem to help much though :redface:
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by joostan
Some of your working is not true. After the bold I recommend you take a look :smile:


is it 2a/b ?
Original post by DJMayes
Have I missed something in the question? It seems fairly straightforward...

Spoiler



Almost identical to my solution, though apparently proof by example is not permitted :redface:
Original post by joostan
Some of your working is not true. After the bold I recommend you take a look :smile:
EDIT: Ignore that - missed the 2 undeneath :tongue: That doesn't seem to help much though :redface:


I noticed if I equated them withotu squaring I would have got a=2b anyway :redface: anymore guidance?
Why does my calculator straightaway rationalise the denominator i messed up a question due to not knowing root3/3 is just 1/root3 but i didnt know that upon closer inspection my calculator just rationalised the denominator do all calculators do this id prefer not to as im bad at realising when its been rationalised or not forgive me for being such a noob i just dnt kno anything bout calculators im self teaching so have no teachers or any help
Original post by Robbie242
is it 2a/b ?


Check my edit - Sorry :smile:
2a2b=ab\frac{2a}{2b} = \frac{a}{b} - this doesn't really help :redface:
Original post by Robbie242
Depends what type of parents honestly :P My mum went insane when I got a few B's and C's at GCSE Lol, along with my A*'s in media but those don't really matter.

If they are likely to get disappointed, I'd just tell them now tbh, to either add shock value to if the results come out good, or to ensure they don't lose their **** on the day.


Hey bro, Do you think there is a chance of me getting an A grade prediction for A2 maths considering those marks?
Thanks
Original post by Robbie242
I noticed if I equated them withotu squaring I would have got a=2b anyway :redface: anymore guidance?


Spoiler

Original post by Revisionbug
Why does my calculator straightaway rationalise the denominator i messed up a question due to not knowing root3/3 is just 1/root3 but i didnt know that upon closer inspection my calculator just rationalised the denominator do all calculators do this id prefer not to as im bad at realising when its been rationalised or not forgive me for being such a noob i just dnt kno anything bout calculators im self teaching so have no teachers or any help


There's nothing wrong with a rationalised denominator.
Personally I prefer it, but really it makes no difference unless it's a show that it's
13\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}
In which case remembering that the two forms are equivalent is necessary.
Reply 3814
Original post by joostan
I can't make any such promises
How about . . .
Prove that: 53\sqrt[3]{5} is irrational? :smile:



53=ab \sqrt[3]{5}=\frac{a}{b}

5=a3b35b3=a3 5=\frac{a^3}{b^3} \rightarrow 5b^3=a^3

b=5w b=5w as it has to be a multiple of 5 if rational

5=(5w)3b35=125w3b3[br]5b3=125w3b3=25w3 5=\frac{(5w)^3}{b^3} \therefore 5=\frac{125w^3}{b^3}[br]\rightarrow 5b^3=125w^3\rightarrow b^3=25w^3

this means b^3 is a multiple of 5 so it should be able to simplify
but if a and b was a multiple of 5 then it should be able to simplify further earlier on...

uhm I dunno Clue please? i've confused myself :cry2:
Original post by joostan
Almost identical to my solution, though apparently proof by example is not permitted :redface:


I don't see why not - it's a valid (and the most sensible!) way of attaining a solution and he can't expect a comprehensive list of solutions as there appear to be infinitely many.
Original post by tigerz
53=ab \sqrt[3]{5}=\frac{a}{b}

5=a3b35b3=a3 5=\frac{a^3}{b^3} \rightarrow 5b^3=a^3

b=5w b=5w as it has to be a multiple of 5 if rational

5=(5w)3b35=125w3b3[br]5b3=125w3b3=25w3 5=\frac{(5w)^3}{b^3} \therefore 5=\frac{125w^3}{b^3}[br]\rightarrow 5b^3=125w^3\rightarrow b^3=25w^3

this means b^3 is a multiple of 5 so it should be able to simplify
but if a and b was a multiple of 5 then it should be able to simplify further earlier on...

uhm I dunno Clue please? i've confused myself :cry2:


In essence this is a solution.
ab\dfrac{a}{b}
was said to be in it's simplest form, which it isn't if both are a multiple of 5 :smile:
This is a contradiction, so therefore the cubed root of 5 is irrational.
Original post by DJMayes
I don't see why not - it's a valid (and the most sensible!) way of attaining a solution and he can't expect a comprehensive list of solutions as there appear to be infinitely many.


Dunno what he's after, but yeah, Felix says he's getting somewhere. :tongue:
Original post by joostan

Spoiler


Spoiler

(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Robbie242

Spoiler


Not quite, because a and b are constants not variables, so saying a=0 is not permissible. :redface:
If you consider what type of number 3a3^a is going to be, and what type 2b2^b is going to be what can you deduce? :smile:

Latest

Trending

Trending