1
   

How to prove it (write it)?

 
 
Wilso
 
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2004 03:48 am
(-K)^2 = (-K)(-K) = +K^2
(-K)^3 = (-K)(-K)(-K) = -K^3

How would you write this?

(-K)^0 = ? = +1

An engineer at work wanted to know this and he asked me because he thought I was at uni this year and could ask one of the maths professors.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 861 • Replies: 9
No top replies

 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2004 08:41 am
I am not positive exactly what you are asking, but if you are trying to represent a number raised to the zero power as factors, as you have above for non-zero powers, you cannot. A number raised to the power of zero is simply defined to be equal to 1.
0 Replies
 
fachatta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2004 03:02 pm
Hope this is what you're looking for. I know i saw the answer to this before, but forgot what it looked like, but this is how i would write it.

(-K)^2 = (-K)^1 * (-K)^1 = (-k)^(1+1) = k ^2

(-k)^3 = (-k) ^1 * (-k) ^1 * (-k) ^1 = (-k) ^ (1 + 1 + 1) = -k ^3

(-k)^0 = (-k) ^1 * (-k) ^ (-1) = (-k)/(-k) = 1
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2004 03:08 pm
what fachatta said, only without losing the exponents (2 and 3, respectively) on the first and second examples.

(-8)/(-8) = 1
(-8)/(-8) = [(-2)^3]/[(-2)^3] = (-2)^(3-3) = (-2)^0
So, (-2)^0 = 1



I find it helpful to use numbers before I use variables. It helps prevent silly mistakes.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 01:58 am
Cool. Thanks guys.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 06:30 am
Yes, that is certainly correct.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 09:18 am
patiodog wrote:

I find it helpful to use numbers before I use variables. It helps prevent silly mistakes.


Yep. your explanation made the most sense-not that I'm not grateful to the others for their input.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 09:20 am
Lifted straight from my (memory of) calculus notes, so I can take no credit. The prof was a sadistic bastard, but his attention to basic principles was exemplary.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 09:24 am
patiodog wrote:
but his attention to basic principles was exemplary.


A lesson my chemistry professor last year still needs to learn. I even heard other academics questioning the way she imparted the information. I did well in the subject, but it was mainly due to some good sites I found on the web. Not because of the lectures.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2004 09:27 am
With the best instructors, I never have to open the textbook. With the worst, I learn everything from it. Very good bacteriology prof right now -- actually uses the chalkboard instead of a computer. Forces him to make the material intelligible and sequential, instead of a mass of information.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How to prove it (write it)?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 06:55:44