|
-
Dec 13th, 2003, 04:26 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Addicted Member
haha
If 2x+1 = 8, find the value of 4x+1.
- you've been privileged to read a post by Miz
-
Dec 13th, 2003, 04:53 PM
#2
Lively Member
-
Dec 13th, 2003, 06:44 PM
#3
Frenzied Member
that's what seems obvious, have we missed something? maybe you are using a different number system? Why would this thread be called haha?
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 09:22 AM
#4
Its evidently a conspiracy that stems back to Roswell and JFK.
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 03:19 PM
#5
Hmmm, if he meant to use [sup] tags, but somehow forgot, then it becomes more interesting:
If 2x+1 = 8, find the value of 4x+1.
50.
Thats the answer, now how's its done without a calculator?
Last edited by NotLKH; Dec 14th, 2003 at 03:25 PM.
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 04:01 PM
#6
Frenzied Member
Using a calculator I get the same answer, but using pen and paper I get 65.
2x+1=8
can be written as:
2x+20=23 right?
As they are all to the same base we can re-write it to:
x+0=3
x=3
putting that in the other eqn:
43+1 = 65
confused :sigh:
Someone tell me where I went wrong.
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 06:23 PM
#7
Originally posted by NotLKH
Thats the answer, now how's its done without a calculator?
Draw it on a pwace of paper.... ....y=4^x +1
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 06:37 PM
#8
Originally posted by Acidic
Using a calculator I get the same answer, but using pen and paper I get 65.
2x+1=8
can be written as:
2x+20=23 right?
As they are all to the same base we can re-write it to:
x+0=3
x=3
putting that in the other eqn:
43+1 = 65
confused :sigh:
Someone tell me where I went wrong.
Your problem is that you are ignoring the +1. You think that you can write it as 2^0 that seems logical. But you can't. You first have to take it over to the other side. Like this.
2^x + 1 = 8
becomes
2^x = 7
then you can do as you did.
2^x = 2^2.807354922
then:
x = 2.807354922
then:
4^x + 1 = 50
UNderstand?
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 07:06 PM
#9
Using logarithms:
2x + 1 = 8
2x = 7
Basic logarithm formula:
bx = c
Ex. log(100) = 2 [Note: 'log' is called Common Logarithm which is in base 10.]
So, b = 10, c = 100, x = 2
So
2x = 7 would make
log(7) in base 2 = log(7)/log(2)
So x = 2.8073549220576041074419693172318 like has been stated.
42.8073549220576041074419693172318 + 1 = 50, again, like has been stated.
The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.
Bertrand Russell
<- Remember to rate posts you find helpful.
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 07:09 PM
#10
Originally posted by jemidiah
Using logarithms:
2x + 1 = 8
2x = 7
Basic logarithm formula:
bx = c
Ex. log(100) = 2 [Note: 'log' is called Common Logarithm which is in base 10.]
So, b = 10, c = 100, x = 2
So
2x = 7 would make
log(7) in base 2 = log(7)/log(2)
So x = 2.8073549220576041074419693172318 like has been stated.
42.8073549220576041074419693172318 + 1 = 50, again, like has been stated.
Yeah that is the calculator way to do it... ....but can you calculate Log in your head????
-
Dec 14th, 2003, 08:06 PM
#11
I'd thought you meant you used a Solve function or similar on a calculator 
As for logarithms without a calculator, I'd assume it's related to the roots question in that it most likely uses some converging series.
The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.
Bertrand Russell
<- Remember to rate posts you find helpful.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:41 AM
#12
Yeah probably. I have never seen Acidics way of doing it. But I liked it. With the right numbers it can be pretty easy to solve the problem.....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:41 AM
#13
Fanatic Member
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:44 AM
#14
Wow...it looks like it works too...I am impressed sql_lall....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:55 AM
#15
Lively Member
Re: easy
Originally posted by sql_lall
2x+1=8
=> 2x = 7
=> 2x * 2x = 7 * 7
=> 4x = 49
=> 4x + 1 = 50 !!!
Very Nice!
-Lou
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 08:29 AM
#16
Frenzied Member
very nice, but does it always work?
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 08:43 AM
#17
Originally posted by Acidic
very nice, but does it always work?
Yeah it will always work. Because you have
2^x + 1 = 8
2^x = 7 <-- remember this
And you can always multiply with the same number on both side. So if what I wrote over is true the "number" 2^x = the number 7
So the multiply "7" on both side will give you.
2^x * 2^x = 7 * 7
That gives you:
2^2x = 49
You can rewrite that to
4^x = 49
And that you can rewrite to
4^x + 1 = 50
QED....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 08:46 AM
#18
Frenzied Member
2^x = 7 <-- remember this
And you can always multiply with the same number on both side. So if what I wrote over is true the "number" 2^x = the number 7
So the multiply "7" on both side will give you.
2^x * 2^x = 7 * 7
Basically you squared both sides. 
That is a very nice method.
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 08:50 AM
#19
Originally posted by Acidic
Basically you squared both sides.
As you will fancy-smancy english writing UK guy.... J/K
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 09:06 AM
#20
Frenzied Member
Actually I'm Swedish, but now live and study in wales.
Though I will be going back to sweden for Xmas.
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 09:10 AM
#21
Hehe...ok then... ....but I was thinking about it when I went to the toilet. And what I said is not the same thing as what you said. But the answer is the same. You are always allowed to do the same thing on both sides of the equation. And I multiplied "7" on both sides, and you squared it....the same answer, but not the same way....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 09:14 AM
#22
Frenzied Member
anyway, all this is based on that Dolor forgot the [sup] tags.
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 09:18 AM
#23
Originally posted by Acidic
anyway, all this is based on that Dolor forgot the [sup] tags.
Yeah....or did he???...
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:47 PM
#24
transcendental analytic
I don't want to be a hypocrit but you have too much time on your hand
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:50 PM
#25
Frenzied Member
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 03:55 PM
#26
Originally posted by kedaman
I don't want to be a hypocrit but you have too much time on your hand
Who where you talking too.....I don't have that ....I have Database exam tomorrow....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:06 PM
#27
transcendental analytic
note: and what have you been doing all day 
acidic: dunno, but I had to put a disclaimer so i wouldn't be called hypocrit just in case
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:11 PM
#28
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:18 PM
#29
transcendental analytic
yeah try that in your exam note, and see what you get 
SELECT note.exam WHERE note.score=0 FROM database.exam
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:21 PM
#30
Originally posted by kedaman
yeah try that in your exam note, and see what you get 
SELECT note.exam WHERE note.score=0 FROM database.exam
Hehe...you are funny....
Answer := project name, ***, country (select name = 'Keda' (VBForum product CCF));
output:
Keda, True, Finland.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:25 PM
#31
transcendental analytic
whats those three stars for? btw I haven't taken the database course yet, so I haven't got a score yet
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:27 PM
#32
Originally posted by kedaman
whats those three stars for? btw I haven't taken the database course yet, so I haven't got a score yet
*** = BØG = ****** = Gay = Homo...and so on....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:45 PM
#33
transcendental analytic
Originally posted by NoteMe
*** = BØG = ****** = Gay = Homo...and so on....
yeah and you forgot the last thing.. = Note
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 04:57 PM
#34
Yeah "Note that Keda is a bøg"....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:02 PM
#35
Frenzied Member
or is he a bög maybe?
j/k
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:04 PM
#36
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:09 PM
#37
Frenzied Member
no terve. Minä haluan [****, I don't know icecream in finnish]
ok:
Hallo, Ich will Glass ******. (?)
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:12 PM
#38
Je ne pas parle 'Germen"....
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:16 PM
#39
Frenzied Member
et je parle francais mais avec tres difficulte.
Have I helped you? Please Rate my posts. 
-
Dec 15th, 2003, 05:20 PM
#40
Tu parle francais trés bien. Mais je ne meme pas ma francais.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|