Summer study and its tips and tricks started right now...
@jenilchudgar24 күн бұрын
Shouldn't there be parenthesis to make it clear?
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
No, the exponent rules are clear. Following the rules, parentheses are not necessary.
@danielgriffiths84524 күн бұрын
In maths you often have variables to the power of and the minus sign is only included if it is in parenthesis or the variable is itself the negative number
@BruceLee-io9by24 күн бұрын
@mrhtutoring Yes, that's true.
@carultch23 күн бұрын
In Excel, yes. Excel doesn't follow the standard order of operations, when it comes to "a minus ain't squared, unless it's been snared". Excel requires you to write -1*3^2 if you want it to evaluate as -9.
@akshatkamboj298118 күн бұрын
Sir in √(-3^2) why can't we cancel our root from square ?
@PowerliftingAndPhysics19 күн бұрын
Bad problem, they should never hinge on the interpretation of where an exponent goes
@kdog390812 күн бұрын
It's being used to illustrate a simple, yet common, mistake in handling exponents. The idea is to illustrate that point, rather than solve the problem.
@jimjenke366124 күн бұрын
I should've had him in my 10th grade Algebra-He would have to coop his dad or Grandpa or get a DeLorean back to 1966.
@UpsideLearn23 күн бұрын
Awesome way of proving that.
@SEEANDPEA24 күн бұрын
Sometimes rewriting makes it easier to evaluate and know what to do by following exponential rules: (-3)^[(1/2)(2)]
@elreturner122724 күн бұрын
There’s something to do with principle roots making this inaccurate but I don’t remember what is is Edit: found it this has to do with functions and x which is kinda cheating as the real numbers and variables have different properties but incase anyone thinks they can do this to a graph I’ll correct them sqrt(x^2) is the same graph as |x| but converting the square root into a power we get x^(1/2)(2) which simplifies to x which is not the same as |x| so the property of converting n-roots into 1/n power doesn’t always apply
@SEEANDPEA21 күн бұрын
@@elreturner1227 how is it cheating when it is covered in exponentiation theorems and can be proven that (a^n)^m = a^(nm) so long you accept the definition that a+a+...+a = a^n
@elreturner122721 күн бұрын
@@SEEANDPEA I’m hoping that you meant multiplication and not addition but even if it is multiplication that definition only works when n is a part of the set of all integers if you were to put 3/2 for n the definition you proposed falls apart because a*1/2a does not equal a^3/2
@pensivenincompoop201621 күн бұрын
He probably meant multiplication. Kinda hard to type out these things on phones, and the * and + are right next to each other. The basis of laws of exponents start from the rule that a^n = a_1 * a_2 * … * a_n. Based from this rule, we can expand that (a^n)^m = (a_1 * a_2 * … * a_n)_1 * (a_1 * a_2 + … * a_n)_2 * … * (a_1 + a_2 * … * a_n)_m. Took me a long to type this out.
@elreturner122721 күн бұрын
@@pensivenincompoop2016 oh that’s the wrong rule I mean transferring a square root to a fractional power
@jakejacobs441119 күн бұрын
-3 is a number. -3^2=9 not -9
@marcusgloder875511 күн бұрын
jakejacobs4411 writes: “-3 is a number. -3^2=9 not -9” No. There is a difference between -3² and (-3)². In the first case, the exponent only refers to 3. The result is then multiplied by -1. In the second case, the exponent refers to -3. Only if the minus sign and the base are in parantheses and the exponent 2 is outside the parantheses, you have a squaring of a negative number, otherwise not. That means: -3² = -1 ‧ 3 ‧ 3 = -1 ‧ 9 = -9 against (-3)² = -3 ‧ -3 = 9 Best regards Marcus 😎
@jtruque10 күн бұрын
@@marcusgloder8755holy cow nobody told me about this.
@MikeStallings20239 күн бұрын
@@marcusgloder8755 This was the only important point of the video, thanks.
@user-lk5kj3vp3d22 сағат бұрын
@@marcusgloder8755how to i know if ^2 for (-3) or just for 3 ?
@marcusgloder875510 сағат бұрын
@@user-lk5kj3vp3d writes: “how to i know if ^2 for (-3) or just for 3 ?” The crucial point are the parentheses. If, for example, you want to square -3, then the minus sign and the 3 must be in parentheses together and the exponent 2 must be outside the parentheses. Only then does the exponent 2 refer to -3 and not just to 3. That means (-3)² = 9. If, on the other hand, you have -3², then that is basically a shortened form of writing for -1 ‧ 3². Because in the order of mathematical operations exponentation always comes before multiplication, the exponent 2 only refers to the 3 and not to -3. It does not matter whether it is an implicit (-3²) or an explicit (-1 ‧ 3²) multiplication. In this case you have -3² = -1 ‧ 3 ‧ 3 = -1 ‧ 9 = -9 Best regards Marcus 😎
@mickaeeljonson820724 күн бұрын
It was multiply itself before the negative sign thats why the answer still negative
@elreturner122724 күн бұрын
If you are referring to -3^2 you can rewrite it as (-1)(3^2) which simplifies to (-1)(9) and then to -9 sense a negative sign can be treated as a -1 being multiplied by the original number(the 9 in this case) this property comes naturally
@erdogankaplan800524 күн бұрын
wonderful
@ConnorMacmillanShorts7 күн бұрын
3
@ilevitatecs22 күн бұрын
Left side is objectively incorrect
@kk121817 күн бұрын
-3^2 = -3*-3 = 9 Is this not correct?
@עםישראלחי2 күн бұрын
How you keep being thin in this age? What is your secret?
@elreturner122724 күн бұрын
I’m trying to answer the questions in comments but he’s already got to all of them
@harshaljoshi563520 күн бұрын
Root of - 3^ = + or - 3 And, Root of - 3's^ = - 3.
@143Cisum14 күн бұрын
Wait.. Wb √-(x)² = |x|?? I love ur way of teaching, so asking ya.. I believe u'll help me get this out.
@aymathconcoursprep18 күн бұрын
Absolut value of - 3 don't equal to - 3
@mtc-j9i24 күн бұрын
Wow….what about rational exponents? Does the order of application matter? Can’t 4^(2/3) power be written both ways, with the power inside or outside the radical?
@carultch23 күн бұрын
The exponent order is only interchangeable, if the base is positive.
@Aziqfajar24 күн бұрын
Mr, on the left side of eq., it's squared on the 3 and not -3?
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
Square sign applies only to the 3.
@ididnothingwr0ng24 күн бұрын
it can only apply to -3 if it is inside the parenthesis. for example: “-3^2 = -9” and “(-3)^2 = 9”
@pianisissimo445924 күн бұрын
Yes
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
Even after watching the video?
@amitabhadatta244824 күн бұрын
😂
@jtruque10 күн бұрын
-3 squared is 9 not -9
@sumportuguesedude260519 күн бұрын
You could just do this: (√-3²)=(√-3)² (√-3²)²=((√-3)²)²) the squared and square roots cancel -3²=-3² -9=-9 if you want to symplify then -3=-3
@akshatkamboj298118 күн бұрын
((√-3)^2)^2) = (√-3)^4
@akshatkamboj298118 күн бұрын
-3^2=-3^2 is wrong
@whiteshadow852023 күн бұрын
Minus 3 squared is 9. You’ve done minus (3 squared) for some reason
@Joao-be2gl23 күн бұрын
I think you are correct. the first one is equal 3.
@mrhtutoring23 күн бұрын
-3²=-9 (-3)²=9 -(3)²=-9
@pista6942021 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoringdamn 🧐
@TheMathManProfundities21 күн бұрын
√(-3²)=√(0-3²)=√(0-9)=√(-9)=3i
@whiteshadow852020 күн бұрын
I would read the minus sign as part of the number that’s being squared. I’m not aware of any rule about this
@cocolcool116 күн бұрын
You absolutely CANNOT do what you did on the right hand side. Separation of square roots is ONLY ever allowed if at most one of the arguments are negative. For example: 2 = 1+1 = 1 +sqrt(1) = 1 + sqrt (-1*-1) [What you just did] Error comes here: = 1 + sqrt(-1)*sqrt(-1) = 1 +i^2 = 1-1 =0 Which is not equal to 2. So you cannot ever separate square roots if both arguments are negative.
@eliteteamkiller31911 күн бұрын
What are you talking about? On the right side, the radical acts as a parentheses, so he could have written that as (sqrt[-3])^2, which undoubtedly is sqrt(-3)*sqrt(-3), as that is the very definition of what "squared" means. He didn't separate anything at all underneath the radical. Nothing of the sort. All he did was rewrite x^2 as x * x.
@eliteteamkiller31911 күн бұрын
Go type "evaluate (sqrt(-3))^2" into google and see for yourself. The "separation" isn't a separation. Nothing was separated. He just re-wrote the squared term. x^2 = x * x. That's all he did. Then he factored out i^2 from the expression, which is also totally valid.
@dumitrudraghia528920 күн бұрын
MARE BRÂNZĂ!
@monowarachoudhury860413 күн бұрын
-3² = 9 and not -9 right
@mrhtutoring13 күн бұрын
I'm 100% certain that -3²=-9
@monowarachoudhury860412 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoring but how? We learnt in our school textbooks that the square of any number is always positive
@mrhtutoring12 күн бұрын
The negative sign only applies to the 3. If it's (-3)², then it's +9.
@DRXZThrees6x23 күн бұрын
-3^2 = 9, how did he get root(-9) or did he just square the 3 like this -(3)^2?
@mrhtutoring23 күн бұрын
-3²=-9 (-3)²=9 -(3)²=-9
@DRXZThrees6x23 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoring thank you
@linsqopiring681620 күн бұрын
You have a strange opinion that -3 squared is -9 because only the 3 gets squared lol.
@mrhtutoring20 күн бұрын
It's not my opinion. It's a fact.
@calculus98824 күн бұрын
mrhtutoring you inspire me, i wish i was like you. I want to be a mathematician ❤ Plz reply
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
I wish you the best with your studies.
@calculus98823 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoring I’m incredibly grateful for your reply. I can’t believe you took the time to answer me. Thank you sir
@QuicksilverBL3DE24 күн бұрын
What happened to the plus or minus after you finish from the square root?
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
Only the principal or the positive root is always used.
@QuicksilverBL3DE23 күн бұрын
Only positive root is used when dealing with complex numbers?
@Brid72723 күн бұрын
@@QuicksilverBL3DE the positive root is what's known as the "principal square root" and when you do operations, it's quite like you're doing functions: can't end up with more than one answer to the same question, just like in functions when it's said that one single input cannot result in two different outputs that's why we only count the positive root you may ask, why the positive root? couldn't mathematicians from back then make the principal root negative? sure, but the thing is that the mathematicians from back then thought of connecting mathematics with real life and so they got rid of the negative root
@Orangecommunity23 күн бұрын
Shouldn't the square of -3 be 9 ?
@420sakura123 күн бұрын
He's Squaring ✓(-3). Not (-3)
@thundero263023 күн бұрын
Thats correct only if the -3 is inside a bracket or parenthesis. (-3)sq. = 9 but -3sq. = -9 If the -3 is not inside bracket or parenthesis, then we first do 3sq. and the add the minus sign.
@TalalGaming593922 күн бұрын
Sir , i have a question If: y=2^x Then why Y^2= 2^2x Why it is not Y^2= 2^x^2 Please mention my name in the title of the video . So that i can easily find the video
@spacetasticadi610319 күн бұрын
Exponential property
@marcusgloder875511 күн бұрын
For example: if you have 2³ and you want to sqare this term, you have (2³)² = 2⁶ = 64 because 8 ‧ 8 = 64 and 2 ‧ 2 ‧ 2 ‧ 2 ‧ 2 ‧ 2 = 64 On the other hand 2^(3^(2)) is not equal to 64, but to 512. Because: 2^(3^(2)) = 2⁹ = 512 Best regards Marcus 😎
@whoff5924 күн бұрын
It is not the question, but you can also see that sqrt( (-3)² ) = sqrt(9) = 3 and ( sqrt(-3) )² = ( i*sqrt(3) )² = -3 so the order of "²" and "sqrt" is significant. If you only see "sqrt" as "power to 1/2" then you would expect that there is no distinction in the order and you could just cancel them out, but: sqrt( (-3)² ) ((-3)²)¹/² = (-3)²/² = -3
@marcusgloder875511 күн бұрын
Hello everyone, without watching the video or reading other comments: √(-3²) = √(-1) ‧ √(3²) = i ‧ 3 = 3i against (√(-3))² = (√(-1) ‧ √(3))² = (i ‧ √(3))² = i² ‧ (√(3))² = -1 ‧ 3 = -3 Therefore the both terms are not equal. Best regards Marcus 😎
@HTDel24 күн бұрын
I mean you are being just purposefully confusing as many people will think of -3^2 as (-3)^2 The reason this is confusing has more to do with disadvantages of a notation system and less to do with understanding i
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
If it's not confusing to 7th graders, it's not confusing. This basic algebra concept is taught early on to middle school students. It's in every pre-algebra textbook I've seen.
@kieran811424 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoring well if you had written it explicitly nobody would be confused and thus no reason for this video 😂. Not really sure what purpose of this was lol
@arandomguy4624 күн бұрын
-3 can be thought of -1*3. It's not complicated.
@HTDel24 күн бұрын
@@arandomguy46 but in common language that is not how it's read. No point arguing with trolls. Grammer, including in mathematics, is not so rigid and there are ways to make points more clear. This is common knowledge and talked about consistently. Main channel is rage baiting
@whoff5924 күн бұрын
it's the normal rule like PEMDAS or so, exponentiation before multiplication. Just as someone else wrote before: You just have to be aware that -3² = (-1)*3² Then you see the order of operations...
@jadelust982724 күн бұрын
🤎
@semio_0124 күн бұрын
/-3² = /9 tho
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
(-3)²=+9 -3²=-9 You can always check it on mathway.com.
@arandomguy4624 күн бұрын
the negative isn't part of the base. We can expand -3^2 as -1*(3^2) and using GEMDAS or PEMDAS, we get -1*9 = -9.
@semio_0124 күн бұрын
@@mrhtutoring yeah sorry it was my fault
@semio_0124 күн бұрын
@@arandomguy46 thanks
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
No problem. 😀
@rgeogllo111 күн бұрын
Badly written
@Thrakerzog24 күн бұрын
WRONG!!! -3 squared is ALWAYS +9
@mrhtutoring24 күн бұрын
No need to yell. -3²=-9 while (-3)²=+9. You can always check it on online calculators such as mathway.com or wolframalpha.com.
@BruceLee-io9by24 күн бұрын
Wrong, my friend. The teacher is right.
@Thrakerzog24 күн бұрын
@@BruceLee-io9by Not the way I and everyone else in my elementary school, high school. and university studied exponents. If there were parentheses denoting that this is -1 * (3^2) then yes but it is NOT denoted and therefore WRONG! I and every maths professor I've ever had would say the same thing.
@BruceLee-io9by23 күн бұрын
@Thrakerzog In Italy it works like this: -3^2=-1*3^2 = -1*9=-9 while (-1*3) ^2= 9. If there is no parenthesis, -1 is not raised to the square, only 3 rises.
@carultch23 күн бұрын
@@Thrakerzog A minus ain't squared, unless it's been snared.