# Doing Parametric differentiation.....finding t problem

Watch
#1
How would i get t from this?

0
2 years ago
#2
(Original post by joyoustele)
How would i get t from this?

Well there is one obvious root, and one not so obvious root.
0
#3
(Original post by RDKGames)
Well there is one obvious root, and one not so obvious root.

and

but i dont know how to get this
0
2 years ago
#4
(Original post by joyoustele)

and

but i dont know how to get this
-2 is clearly not a root. Means your equation is wrong
0
2 years ago
#5
(Original post by joyoustele)

and

but i dont know how to get this
Please post the original question. It looks like either you've made a mistake in your working or the equation you posted in your OP is wrong.
1
#6
(Original post by RDKGames)
-2 is clearly not a root. Means your equation is wrong
k, I went wrong some where then, Thanks
0
2 years ago
#7
factorise:

t { -2 + t ( 1 + t )2 } = 0

then have a think...
0
#8
(Original post by Notnek)
Please post the original question. It looks like either you've made a mistake in your working or the equation you posted in your OP is wrong.
Thanks, worked it out, silly mistake from me
1
2 years ago
#9
Trying to solve without numerical methods is possible but looks like a nightmare...

Luckily this isn't something that the OP has to do
0
2 years ago
#10
(Original post by the bear)
factorise:

t { -2 + t ( 1 + t )2 } = 0

then have a think...
I've had a think, now what
0
#11
(Original post by Notnek)
Trying to solve without numerical methods is possible but looks like a nightmare...

Luckily this isn't something that the OP has to do
lol
0
2 years ago
#12
(Original post by Notnek)
Trying to solve without numerical methods is possible but looks like a nightmare...

Luckily this isn't something that the OP has to do
Just slam the cubic formula on it, what’s so difficult?
0
2 years ago
#13
(Original post by RDKGames)
Just slam the cubic formula on it, what’s so difficult?
Yes I suppose you'd need to resort to using the cubic formula here because other methods are too nasty.
0
2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Notnek)
Yes I suppose you'd need to resort to using the cubic formula here because other methods are too nasty.
Just solved it in my head using it.

I’d tell you but this post is too narrow to contain it.
1
2 years ago
#15
(Original post by RDKGames)
Just solved it in my head using it.

I’d tell you but this post is too narrow to contain it.
I also did it in my head using a linear adjustment followed by then , which turns it into a quadratic.

Simple.
0
X

new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

### See more of what you like onThe Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

### Poll

Join the discussion

Yes (256)
33.82%
No (501)
66.18%

View All
Latest
My Feed

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

### See more of what you like onThe Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.