#Help!
72 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
- Do not ping the Moderators, unless someone is breaking the rules.
- Do not ping the Helper Moderators, unless there is a conflict between helpers.
- Do not ping other members randomly for help.
- Ask your question and show the work you've done so far. If you've posted a screenshot of a question, specify which part you need help with.
- Wait patiently for a helper to come along.
- If the Helper has answered your question, remember to thank them with the Mathematics Ranks bot and close the thread with:
+close
Feel free to nominate the person for helper of the week in #helper-nominations
If you're happy with the help you got here, and the server overall, you can contribute financially as well:
honestly idk if you can learn this it feels more like pattern recognition to me
spam questions type
means
Actually I need to find out its irrational or not
it's definitely irrational
So if I think in this way that root 2 + root 3, the root sign in which there is 2 + root 3
if it were rational you could square it and get a rational
but its square is 2+sqrt(3)
Okay means we have to consider only 2 + sqrt(3)
oh it does?
then the sqrt in which 2 + root 3 are there
what should we do with it?
I am having confusion only because of that sqrt in which there are complete eqn
..
ok I mean you want 2 + sqrt(3) to be the square of some number right
so ideally you want something like 2+sqrt(3) = (a+bsqrt(3))^2
this is a bit bad because the RHS is going to become a^2 + 3b^2 + 2absqrt(3) which is kinda big
also there's a 2 on the sqrt(3)
so what you kinda want to do is scale the 2+sqrt(3) up a bit
I don't understand, where is x?
Or do you just need to evaluate some value
You can do that well using the root by hand method
And some division by decimals
Are you looking for this exact type of problem to keep attempting, or just problems which contain the sqrt function? If you want all kinds of radicals to simplify, google "radical expressions", and look at the resources from there.
Anyways, the first thing you should know is what the term of this expression is, which is a "nested radical". Now, we actually have a formula to simplify this sort of radical. Do you know what it is?
It is not irrational. It has an answer.
it’s irrational, i checked the answer
i propose a different method.
let rt(2+rt(3))=rt(a)+rt(b)
then squaring we have that a+b+2rt(ab)=2+rt(3)
this is a little more simplified as we can correlate the integer and irrational parts
@ebon ice
you can form a quadratic equation that gives values of a and b from the product and sums
using vieta’s
Apologies. I seemed to have mixed up the definition for irrational. Yes, your method also works. That is exactly how I attempted the problem, before finding the formula for de-nesting. I find it to be impractical though, and I just recommend jumping straight to the de-nesting formula, since they have already done everything for you.
I mean I was just gonna say like multiply both sides by 2 and that makes it a nice square
if you really want to simplify it
fr
no variable only number 
sqrt(69+sqrt(42))
this type of
to get good at these type of questions you need to know the (a+b)^2 and (a-b)^2 formula
and that's about it
it's seldom worse like no one asks (sqrt(2)+sqrt(3)+1)^2, but any of that can be solved with simple factorization, or just being familiar with (a+b+c)^2. never are too many terms used
a good thing to remember is that if u want a+sqrt(b) to be perfect square, the radical term must have a coefficient of 2 (or any even number), only then u can think about making it a square
sometimes it'll be like
$\sqrt{19+\sqrt{192}}$
fr
but ur first step would be to see if u can take anything out of the root in the first place
if u cant then try to introduce a coeff of 2 like i did here
if that doesnt work
goodluck 🗣️
(theres probably some other trick)
he doesnt care about the answer to this specifric problem
he wants to learn how to solve such problems
and these problems usually have a method so the best thing to do is to solve one problem for them
fine
I mean I was halfway to saying that anyways but like
oh lmao didnt see tat
BRUH
wdym BRUH
oh the context here is algebra again
nah i wanted to provide a method without
I mean like the intuition is basically “sub values” right
I was trying to like spell it out idk maybe that’s not the best way to explain it
@ebon ice
Hello shreekant021, this is a friendly reminder that your help request has been inactive for more than 24 hours. If you no longer need assistance, please consider closing the thread using the +close command. This thread will be automatically closed in 3 days if it remains inactive.
Yes.
state it