Don’t learn by memorization, understand how it work and you can apply to more cases.
@gourav116310 ай бұрын
memorize it if you are using it way too many times and traditional method taking time.
@PranitSuman9 ай бұрын
The geometrical meaning of completing the square
@RegardedBee1859 ай бұрын
U don’t need to understand how it works.
@lunamoonintheverse9 ай бұрын
Can someone explain to me why we do this because I don’t understand it but I can do the method?
@chocolateangel87436 ай бұрын
@@RegardedBee185 Many people do need to understand how algorithms work in order to successfully execute them. It's actually how they learn. I'm one such person.
@YoYo-qr6fm11 ай бұрын
In Taiwan, we learn the “Factoring Method”(not sure what it’s called in English) by finding two factors of -12 which are -6&2, -6 and 2 can be add up as the constant 4 in x term. Times them (x-6)(x+2)=0, and there’s the easy answer. If the constant term isn’t dividable, I’ll use the quadratic formula x= (-b±√(b²-4ac))/(2a). Pretty simple imo. The way you use is quite non-intuitive for me. Still pretty nice to learn a new way.
@Hemimana10 ай бұрын
The reason you’d do this is to make it easier to do algebraic proof for increasing/decreasing functions You could solve the above equation by (x-2)^2-16 = 0 (X-2)^2 = 16 x-2=+/- 4 x = 6 or -2 The factoring method could be quicker for numbers that could fully factorise but I think it’s probably quicker than if you’d use the quadratic formula on numbers that couldn’t fully factorise
@giovanji788310 ай бұрын
I also find it non-intuitive, also aren't you supposed to have everything at grade 1? (I mean without exponents, I don't know how you say it in english) In italy we call the first method you used "trinomio notevole" or "trinomio speciale", (special thrinomial) where you find the 2 numbers that when multiplied are equal to c (so -12) and when added are equal to b (so -4) those 2 numbers being -6 and 2, so you can rewrite the entire thrinomial as (x-6)(x+2). I think you have to have everything without exponents, so is (x-2)²-16 a complete answer? And obviously after (x-6)(x+2)=0 the solutions are 6 and -2
@YoYo-qr6fm10 ай бұрын
@@giovanji7883 yeah, I think learning each method is totally applicable in simple math. But when it comes to advanced math, like Laplace transform or Fourier transform, the exponent 2,3,4… will become really annoying. Using first method will make it easier to calculate. Btw, what do you mean by having everything in grade 1? I didn’t get it.
@C7590310 ай бұрын
Completing the square is used to make an "unfactorable" problem easily solvable using square roots. If you can factor it's probably easier to just factor.
@advitshanbhag433510 ай бұрын
That is actually the method many(mostly asians and by asians I mean the whole asia, not the one in memes) use.
@sean5364 Жыл бұрын
I’ve been done with math for a while now but thanks for helping get a 750 on the math section of my SAT 3 years ago
@LudusYT Жыл бұрын
Hey!!! I’m so glad I could help ya do that!!! What are ya studying now?
@sean5364 Жыл бұрын
@@LudusYT right now I’m getting my paramedic license but I did an AA in Bio and I’m gonna go back to university after a couple of years for Microbio.
@LudusYT Жыл бұрын
@@sean5364 that’s so cool!!! Totally keep me posted with how that’s going and lmk if I can help in anyway with anymore math/physics videos!
@tannerboos226810 ай бұрын
This works great if the coefficient on x^2 is 1. For other cases you need to factor first, not just use half the value of b.
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
Yes, I should have specified that in this video. Thanks for clarifying!!
@laurendoe16810 ай бұрын
That's all well and good in this example where you end up with "a^2 - b^2" where a=x-2 and b = 4. This factors out to (a+b)(a-b). Substituting, we get ((x-2)+4)((x-2)-4), which becomes (x+2)(x-6) with roots x=6, x=-2. If c had been (say) 11, you wouldn't have been so lucky.
@JadazInterludez4 ай бұрын
Thank you 🙏🏾 I needed this
@walterp1028 Жыл бұрын
A far faster method to solve for X, take -12. Look for two numbers that multiply to -12, but also add up to -4. Those numbers would be +2 and -6. So you would have (x+2) (x-6). You can then just set each of them equal to 0. X+2=0 and X-6=0. This is also known as the Master Product method. Usually for me I start here. If this doesn't work I just go straight to quadratic formula. Usually works out better for me that way.
@LudusYT Жыл бұрын
Oh yea I NEVER solve quadratic equations this way. I do the exact same process as you. Try to factor first and if that doesn’t work then plug into the quadratic formula. Completing the square is just beneficial for finding the vertex of a parabola (which we can now do in this problem) as well as finding the centers of conic sections.
@datboy03810 ай бұрын
Yeah but this isn’t always reliable so why risk it
@walterp102810 ай бұрын
@@datboy038 neither is completing the square. Quadratic is the only thing that can always solve it.
@datboy03810 ай бұрын
@@walterp1028 what drugs are you on? Completing the square will always solve it’s literally just a simpler form of the quadratic formula
@walterp102810 ай бұрын
@@datboy038 bro literally if the x^2 coefficient is anything other than 1 it won't work. Edit technically it can work, but in those scenarios it is far more likely to get errors than if you just go straight to quadratic. Or you can master product by putting factors of "a" in front of the 2 different x equations
@SkullPrince811 ай бұрын
This is more efficient but it's still important to understand the other method because you actually learn why it works not just that it works. It's like how we have to use limits to take derivatives in calculus before we are allowed to use power rule and the other shortcuts.
@LudusYT11 ай бұрын
I agree, except i think this method can be learned initially instead of the other one. It just needs to be explained why it actually works like you’re saying.
@SkullPrince811 ай бұрын
@@LudusYT just showing this method doesn't explain why it works. Maybe you can start with this method after showing a proof that it works.
@LudusYT11 ай бұрын
@@SkullPrince8 I agree. For now, this video will at least get kids completing the square. If they want a video explaining why it works, I’ll make that video.
@NicholasBertollo10 ай бұрын
@@LudusYTbeing able to do it is useless. The reason why is of 100% importance. If kids are able to do it by memorisation only. Then they cannot do it at all. Like completing the square in everyday life is useless. But understanding algebra and how to manipulate things properly at least teaches how the relationships between variables can be taken advantage of.
@RegardedBee1859 ай бұрын
@@LudusYTnah bro I’m in University and my prof taught the same method you did. You don’t need to know how it works
@FerreroRocher-r3f3 ай бұрын
Amazing explanation thank you sir❤
@methulidulanima53449 ай бұрын
Thank you ! 😊
@lpspankekКүн бұрын
Our teacher has taught us only this method about completing the square not the other typical method ( i don't even know that typical method) and this is really much easier 😊😅
@sambajawo51399 ай бұрын
It doesn't matter what sign is in the bracket, just subtract the squared number
@ahmedelmasry409810 ай бұрын
Hi, I am a Mathematics Teacher, so can I download your videos and share them with my students?
@qwjk110 ай бұрын
cam you please make a detailed explaination on this. I dont want to just memorize and want to actually understand ahat we r doing
@s_tupid125610 ай бұрын
divide b by 2 you get -2 right. then the last number has to be -2*-2 which is 4 (foil method is what i usde to determine that (a+b)^2 = a^2 +2ab + b^2 so it would be 4 at the end to make it wrk. so all u do is add 16 to each side. and get (x-2)^2=16 which you could also get with his way by adding 16 to both sides. then u do the sqrt get x-2=4 then x=6
@xpsu13195 ай бұрын
Me literally in calc II having to watch this cuz I forgot xD
@theblueshoewillgetyou435 ай бұрын
too real, one of the only things I never fully understood
@rishavsingh2799 ай бұрын
Thanks for revision man, i forgot this trick.
@ganeshramamoorthy953910 ай бұрын
It's a simple rule: sum of factors is b: product of factors is c - holds for all qudratics
@Rishi-cr7et8 ай бұрын
This is the common method we use in finding conic equations in india😂
@WhyOhWhy12310 ай бұрын
Thanks. Please can we have a real world example.
@ThePainkiller999510 ай бұрын
of what, a quadratic equation? lol
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
If you throw a ball in the air, its motion will trace out a parabola. Completing the square allows us to find the vertex of the parabola which can give us how high the ball goes. It also allows us to find the zeros which is where the ball is thrown and where it lands.
@preppypotatoes127 күн бұрын
I have a 7x ad in kumon we can’t do decimals so any suggestion?
@soumenkumar97498 ай бұрын
In India, we call it middle term factorisation
@BernardGreenberg10 ай бұрын
This is really easier than the quadratic formula, which has already completed the square for you? No way.
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
I love the quadratic formula, and it certainly is faster for solving quadratic equations, but completing the square has other uses like getting a quadratic into vertex form which is what I’m doing here. You can’t use quadratic formula for that.
@lylousamy526510 ай бұрын
X^2 - 4x - 12 (X - 6) ( x+2)
@mikarpman10 ай бұрын
If you were going to teach completing the square, but you write the equation with the letter A as the coefficient of the quadratic term, then it is incumbent upon you to explain what to do with it. Otherwise you should say that you are assuming that A equals 1.
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
Yea, I agree I should’ve said we need a = 1 to do this.
@Cardsandstoagies11 ай бұрын
I have never completed the square in my entire life and I have a degree in engineering. Maybe I had to relearn it for differential equations or something but that was for a specific thing and it was quickly forgotten. Not an important skill, just understand concepts.
@adw1z10 ай бұрын
It is fundamentally important in so many different ways if u study in a math degree and more advanced
@carultch10 ай бұрын
That's because you live in an age when you have access to a computer and the internet in the professional world. Had you been an engineer 50 years ago, you'd likely need to use this all the time. Even if it is unlikely one will need to use this skill, it's still important to use so you understand what a formula is doing, rather than just blindly using it like a machine.
@soliSchuler10 ай бұрын
Hi, I see the equation is factorable, so why are you trying to complete the square. There's nothing wrong in completing the square when it's factorable, it will still work. but the main use-cases people use the completing the square method is when a quadratic equation isn't factorable. There's 4 methods for quadratic equations; factoring, extraction of roots, completing the square, and the quadratic formula. Decending from easiest to most complex, If your showing a simple problem with a complex process, it doesn't show the importance of this method. What I would advise is taking a problem that is "perfect" for completing the square.
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
I get your point but I don’t consider solving to be a main use-case of completing the square (unless you’re plugging directly into the quadratic formula). The main things we use CTS for is finding the vertex of a parabola, finding the center of a circle from an equation, etc. That’s why my example is fine here, I have no intention of solving this, so I picked a nice and easy quadratic and got it in vertex form.
@flightyavian10 ай бұрын
Why are people talking about A, coefficient of X² here? You dont need a solution for the A coefficient, just divide the rest of the terms by A if it's bothering you... 0 divided by anything is still 0 anyways
@alecwulfhorst10976 ай бұрын
What if B is odd
@leosin576710 ай бұрын
how about just differentiate it with power rule and solve for the vertex coordinate
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
Bruh this is an algebra tutorial… lolol.
@2_rl_7629 ай бұрын
Much easier just to apply Vieta's formula
@aliadnan428 ай бұрын
In our country, we just factor it.
@kayakMike100010 ай бұрын
Uh.... How abou just factor it? Just look, you need two numbers that sum is -4 and product is -12. So 2 and -6 seems good.
@SuperSuperspoof7 ай бұрын
Factoring is a different goal than completing the square.
@jacplanespotting31410 ай бұрын
On the one hand, quick and you get the answer…. On the other hand, you don’t understand the process and lose marks in an evaluation…..
@mikeyktАй бұрын
But what is b is negative
@fe4less8758 күн бұрын
i did this shit mentally in 5th grade
@ololmn10 ай бұрын
just do it how you were taught. no need to complicate things you already know
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
You can if you want 🤷🏻♂️. I just like this way the best.
@RegardedBee1859 ай бұрын
He made it a lot simpler, r u slow?
@SESH_12Ай бұрын
what if B is 2
@mirox391810 ай бұрын
It is much faster to solve through Vieta's theorem, the roots are primitive
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
Yea I don’t consider CTS to be a fast solving method. CTS is more for getting quadratics in vertex form.
@alborto656710 ай бұрын
+16 both sides and x=±4-2
@TC1TheOrginal8 ай бұрын
How many people use this in the real world. Why do we learn this maths?
@michaelz655510 ай бұрын
Or you could, you know, factor it into x-6 and x+2…
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
But this is a tutorial for, you know, completing the square lol. CTS has other uses like finding the vertex of a parabola which you can’t do as easily by factoring.
@adrienmigliore589510 ай бұрын
Or you test quickly the solutions, you need to get +12 so X will be even, you need to have -4X to be positive so -2 works Then you try 4 and -4, easy to see it doesn’t work, then you see quickly that -6 works That’s the end
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
I’m not trying to solve the quadratic formula. I wanted it in vertex form.
@adrienmigliore589510 ай бұрын
@@LudusYT I didn’t see the full name of the referenced video my bad I didn’t know that vertex form, that’s a great finding, thanks a lot 🙏
@adw1z11 ай бұрын
It’s very simple why. (x+a)^2 = x^2 + 2ax + a^2 . So, (x+a/2)^2 = x^2 + ax + (a/2)^2 . So, x^2 + ax + b = (x+a/2)^2 - (a/2)^2 + b It’s more important students learn WHY it works, more so than how it works
@LudusYT11 ай бұрын
Yea i hear ya. Obviously I couldn’t explain both the steps and why they work in this video which was limited to 60s. I can make another video on why it works if people want it. Mostly, people just want to know how to do it.
@T-.__.-R10 ай бұрын
High school 2 in Turkey
@coachneok9 ай бұрын
You need to include the caveat of this only working on monics. Kids would not know.
@TheMathManProfundities7 ай бұрын
With a quadratic this easy, why not just factorise. x²-4x-12=0⇒(x-6)(x+2)=0⇒x=-2 or 6. For a method that does not require x² on its own or adding the magic number (square and subtract stage) see: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f57GZYmfnqlkrrs
@rk-fb5hw10 ай бұрын
Might have helped if you had started by defining completing the square
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
This video assumes you already know what completing the square is. I only have 60 seconds, but I agree that I should make a video on why you complete the square and also tie in how completing the square is where the quadratic formula comes from! Thanks for the suggestion!
@radhakrishnamohanty380710 ай бұрын
Divide by 2a...
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
I always factor out the a if it’s not equal to 1.
@eagle3234911 ай бұрын
(x - 2)^2 - 16 = 0 (x - 2 - 4) * (x - 2 + 4) = 0 (x - 6) * (x + 2) = 0 x^2 - 6x + 2x - 12 = 0 x^2 - 4x - 12 = 0 Therefore, the method can also be used to find that x^2 - 4x - 12 = (x - 6) * (x + 2).
@nuze40479 ай бұрын
X=6?
@RKGD1310 ай бұрын
It’s b/2a, not b/2
@LudusYT10 ай бұрын
If you have an a, you would want to factor it out first! That way it’s still b/2. I can upload a sequel video eventually
@Abu-f9b7 ай бұрын
thanks
@imyrzaim624110 ай бұрын
X=6
@reload283210 ай бұрын
Is this not how everyone does it? Anything else looks weird
@hiloworle710610 ай бұрын
-6*2 = -12 -6+2 = -4 Where is the fkin mystery.. ? Only a Dumas would complete square here