The square root of 8 divided by the square root of 3 =? Many won’t know the ANSWER!

Рет қаралды 84,073

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 153

@josephcorvino1363 11 ай бұрын

I find the little math problems very interesting. However, you talk waaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy too much. Every time I try to watch one of your videos your constant repeating of every detail begins to drive me crazy by the 2 minute mark.

@terry_willis 11 ай бұрын

John needs to label each problem with a difficulty level (saying "Many will get this wrong" does not help us). Joseph, in your case, you are learning and getting better, so the easier problems get boring to you. So with a difficulty level label, you could skip the easy peasy ones and do the harder ones.

@utha2665 11 ай бұрын

The videos are aimed at someone that has no experience with this type problem. You can always skip parts of the video you don't like, like I do.

@C-man553 10 ай бұрын

Exactly.

@saeedzafar7041 11 ай бұрын

Overexplained. This is a short video on KZbin, not a 45 min class.

@harrymatabal8448 8 ай бұрын

I totally agree

@TravisMcGee151 8 ай бұрын

@@harrymatabal8448Maybe you guys don’t realize that the longer the viewing time the more they get paid. Those who put videos out purposely drag them out for the $.

@mpicard 8 ай бұрын

Depends on who you are. Sounds like you guys dont need any explqnation. This longer version will truly help a lot of people struggling to truly understand the fundamentals.

@JuneT48 7 ай бұрын

Totally agree. All videos have very interesting content but presented laboriously slowly. I am constantly scrolling forward to get to the point.

@michellepopkov940 9 ай бұрын

As Monty Python would say: GET ON WITH IT!

@brucecorbettn9bh398 8 ай бұрын

I’m 73 years old trying to refresh relearn this stuff. I remember my calculus teacher saying throw away your notebook, but I did. I see some of this stuff and say to myself, at one time I knew this and it was easy. But the fact is, if you no longer use the math you will lose it. So, don’t ever stop.

@MichaelGWandrey 10 ай бұрын

Just in my head this reduced to Sqrt (8 /3) and then to 2 * Sqrt(2/3) Which I think is the simplest process and simplest answer. By definition 2/3 is a rational number and taking SQRT of it is valid

@rogergriffiths3345 8 ай бұрын

Yes, it’s as simple as that 👍. A waste of just over 17 min of anyone’s time

@iangraham871 11 ай бұрын

I got an A in maths at High School (UK A-level, just prior to University), but i don't think i ever knew that the product of the square roots of two numbers is equal to the square root of the product of those two numbers. It was 40 years ago, but thanks for this.

@twentyrothmans7308 10 ай бұрын

Similar, but first year Maths at Uni, but I suspect that it just disappears through inactivity. Half the fun is reading other peoples' solutions, and their reasoning.

@KenFullman 9 ай бұрын

If you did A level maths you definitely did know that rule. If you have many values to multiply together, it doesn't matter which order you multiply them in, the result will be the same. So call your first number (AxA), call your second number (BxB) So The product of those two numbers could be (AxA)(BxB) But if you take the product of their square roots, you'd get (AxB) Which is the square root of (AxB)(AxB) which is (AxB) squared But like I say, it doesn't matter what order you do the multiplication so (AxA)(BxB) =(AxB)(AxB) = (AxB) squared So I'm pretty sure, at one time, you must have known this.

@Steve-pu4zx 11 ай бұрын

1.63299.....

@davidlockwood9915 11 ай бұрын

Far too long. Drives you nuts.

@clipperledgard524 10 ай бұрын

After all this, do you know the answer? Or you just know another way to represent the same expression?

@peacemaker1122 11 ай бұрын

Well i got 1.63 and checked with my calculator and it thinks the same, how are we both wrong?

@56edb 10 ай бұрын

I did sq rt of 8 divided by sq rt 3 and got 1.63 on my calculator. When i pressed the equal button gave me 2/3 sq rt 6.

@dustmaker1000 8 ай бұрын

This is why I always struggled on tests…. I calculated (sq rt of 16 x sq rt of 1.5)/3….. or (4*sq rt of 1.5)/3……. This calculates to the same answer of approx 1.63 but this instructor says if the answer isn’t (2* sq rt 6)/3 then the answer is wrong even though the end calculated number is the same

@panlomito 11 ай бұрын

I turned SQR(8) into 2SQR(2). Then multiplied by SQR(3) is 2 x SQR(2x3) = 2SQR(6)... and divided by 3 gives 2SQR(6)/3 OR (2/3)SQR(6)

@baseline33 8 ай бұрын

I’m pushing 90. My working life was spent in the telecommunications business. The only time I needed to work out the square root of anything was to pass the maths exams as part of my technical studies.

@faiththrower7951 7 ай бұрын

😂😂😂😂😂

@danieldennis9831 11 ай бұрын

2√6/3

@sirechoe1236 10 ай бұрын

I worked it out on pen and paper the way I did it 55 years ago. I came up with 1.633. You know 3x3=9, too much. 2x2=4, too much. Keep breaking both numbers down from there. 2.8x2.8=7.84, too small. 1.7x1.7=2.89, too small. next is 2 place decimals followed by 3 place decimals.

@stuartyoung5728 11 ай бұрын

If a transcendental number such as pi or e in the denominator, then it's stuck there.

@alext8828 11 ай бұрын

Not really. You can always multiply by the dirigible of the recipient.

@devonwilson5776 11 ай бұрын

Greetings. The answer is 2/3 times the square root of 6. The square root of 6 divided by the square root of 3 is the square root of 8 times the square root of 3 all divided by the square root of 3 times the square root of 3. That is (8^1/2×3^1/2)÷ 3^1/2×3^1/2= 24^1/2÷ (3^(1/2+1/2))=2(6^1/2)÷3^1= 2/3(6^1/2)=1.6, rounded. I guess that one would go through all this work to show an understanding of working with radicals. Why else, when you can simply divide 8^1/2 by 3^1/2 to get 1.6?

@stuartyoung5728 11 ай бұрын

Two thirds the square root of six.

@jimyoung-gy9lx 9 ай бұрын

You take too long to get to the poiht 😩

@johnwsimpson3153 9 ай бұрын

(2/3)x(sqrt(6) ) and 2x(sqrt(2/3)) are both correct answers. They are equal to each other. The instructor got the first one, and the second is the result if the instructor's ban on square roots in the denominator is ignored. There is nothing wrong with square roots in the denominator. Irrational numbers and rational numbers are both real numbers. There is nothing wrong with dividing by an irrational number. The result will not be a rational number, but it will be a real number.

@matsonnerby 11 ай бұрын

To be honest, I don’t understand why one of these is a question, and the other is an answer.

@aryusure1943 11 ай бұрын

@matsonnerby Indeed! But he never tells all the story. So we have to figure out the logic by ourselves sometimes. See my comment if you will. I try to fill the void.

@gavindeane3670 11 ай бұрын

Exactly.

@stevereade4858 6 ай бұрын

Square both sides, divide, take square root. (8exp0.5/3exp0.5)exp2=xexp2. x=(8/3)exp0.5 Cuts several (confusing) steps!

@albertmoore4445 8 ай бұрын

Dad, can you help me with this birdhouse I'm building, you're a math professor. Sure, Son, what is the problem? I'm supposed to make the short side the square root of 8 divided by the square root of 3 inches long, and I don't know how long that is. Oh, that's easy, it's 2 times the square root of 6 over 3! Thanks, Dad!

@PYTHAGORAS101 8 ай бұрын

This seems a bit convoluted and while the result is correct, it is not quite satisfactory to me. The result of the division of two square roots is always the square root of the division of the integers. So, the answer is simply sqrt (8/3) = sqrt (2.666...) = 1.633

@TheMathManProfundities 6 ай бұрын

What's with all the rubbish about turning an irrational problem into a rational one? That would be alchemy and is not possible. And guess what, you failed, your answer is still irrational. Probably your worst statement was that you can't divide by √3, yes you can, even with your unnecessary rational restriction (√3/√3 is rational). All you've done here is to simplify an expression, rationality has nothing to do with it.

@AndrewJ-u9o 6 ай бұрын

Would be much simpler to say the way to get rid of the irrational denominator is to multiply the numerator and denominator by the denominator. Then, using the rules of exponents, the denominator becomes 3 and the numerator becomes the sq rt of the products, ie. sq rt of numerator and denominator, which is 24. Then one can look for factors of 24, one of which is a perfect square (4x6), 4 being a perfect square. etc.

@thomasmaughan4798 9 ай бұрын

Interesting. Start by factoring the numerator sqrt(2)*sqrt(4) over sqrt(3). Thats 2 * sqrt(2) over sqrt(3). Multiply top and bottom by sqrt(3) so you get 2 * sqrt(6) over 3. Some of these steps are duplicated in a similar problem.

@danluzurriaga6035 6 ай бұрын

Not creators' fault but please give feedback to stop these Filipino adds with cross-eyed children sipping straws etc... It gets attention I suppose but it is really child abuse as the child will later see how his/her cross-eyed appearance was used to make money. Stop the child abuse in Filipino ads.

@MerryDrums 7 ай бұрын

Oops, in my haste forgot to deal with √24 which = √4 x √6 = 2 √6 therefore correct answer is 2 √6 all divided by 3

@rogergriffiths3345 8 ай бұрын

Glad this guy didn’t teach in my department. Answer is achievable by mental arithmetic for goodness sake!

@smokert5555 9 ай бұрын

Cool, but my calculator says 1.63. I though we were shooting for actual numbers and not another equation.

@richardjohnston3031 7 ай бұрын

All of you complaining about the length of the class should get extra homework! LOL

@davidg4288 11 ай бұрын

OK, TLDR is rationalize the denominator and simplify. Thanks for reminding me though!

@johnbell1184 6 ай бұрын

I always wonder what is the practical use of a specific math problem, Eg: where would we use this radical square root problem ?

@leightonscycles9915 7 ай бұрын

So what's the point? After all that work where does it get you? To me you still have a number that doesn't mean anything!

@larrydickenson8922 8 ай бұрын

The answer is the square root of 2.6666666 ad infinitum. Get out you calculator or log tables.

@jeromesassani9537 11 ай бұрын

You should memoprize the Sqrt of 2,3, and 8. sqrt 0f 2 = 1.414. sqrt of 8 is twice the sqrt of 2 or 2.828. sqrt 0f 3 = 1.732.

@williamdelmar3964 10 ай бұрын

As an engineer We can get the answer for all practical purposes. So, what you said, to however significant figures you need.

@jeromesassani9537 10 ай бұрын

@@williamdelmar3964 For classroom situations. I am from pre-calculator times and wasn't a math or physics major.

@williamdelmar3964 10 ай бұрын

Similar here, precalculator educated. Memorizing a few key results and numbers, makes it easier to check your slide rule answer.@@jeromesassani9537

@apopisso6302 7 ай бұрын

The exam supervisor,” times up” .But I haven t finished the first question yet!

@brocksprogramming 6 ай бұрын

Radicals have never been my strong point as I'm quite mild.😅

@larryhomann 8 ай бұрын

Long winded , drifts off the point . and please don't underline stuff , not a 6 yr old kid ; why not point to every letter with your finger

@mathmandrsam 9 ай бұрын

The answer is 1.63... type sqrt(8) / sqrt (3) = and you're there.

@jeffreyschmiedeck4254 6 ай бұрын

This guy just rambles on . The guy on Science and Math is a better teacher!

@Peterseng24 8 ай бұрын

Start at 9:20. Way too long a video for such a simple problem. 🇦🇺

@stevewthespider 7 ай бұрын

I hate irrational numbers as they are impossible to measure with tape measures or yard/meter sticks.

@johnplong3644 9 ай бұрын

Well you can’t have a radical in the denominator That is a clue

@syedmdabid7191 9 ай бұрын

Eheu!!! Id est 4√6/3vel √(8/3) responsimus.

@christopherellis2663 7 ай бұрын

¾ thre quarters. Nobody came fourth

@kimchee94112 9 ай бұрын

Square root of 3 is allowed everywhere.

@MartinHermans-dw3is 10 ай бұрын

This is way too long an answer to this problem.

@tpobrienjr 8 ай бұрын

2x1.4142/1.7321 no radicals.

@batavuskoga 11 ай бұрын

Why isn't it allowed to have a square root in de denominator ? I know perfectly how to get rid of the square root in the denominator

@thomasmaughan4798 9 ай бұрын

Many of these problem examples are part of a much larger formula or equation. Simplifying as you go along *usually* helps in the long run. Very complex formulas can gradually build up errors if you do everything numerically (calculator, decimal approximations).

@michaelkeffer504 8 ай бұрын

(2√6)/3 is the answer.

@MerryDrums 7 ай бұрын

Answer equals √24/3

@C-man553 10 ай бұрын

Mr. Roberts does irrationals.

@albertmoore4445 8 ай бұрын

1.633 or roughly .015 more than the Golden Ratio, close to the same as 5/3, (Fibonacci #5 over #4)

@krisswegemer1163 10 ай бұрын

No irrational numbers in the denominator is a weird preference, not a rule. It has no mathematical significance and is not practiced with any consistency. The same people who would not put the square root of 3 in the denominator would put pi in the denominator.

@innocentodenigbo7284 6 ай бұрын

That's interesting.

@tomtke7351 11 ай бұрын

(+/-2×sqrt(6))/3 like proper manners at the dinner table you're not supposed to have a radical (sqrt sign) in the denominator of a fraction. So multiply numerator and denominator by [sqrt(3)]. The backbone of algebra is do the same to both parts: (-1-) equation: same on left and right side. (-2-) fraction: same on numerator and denominator.

@gavindeane3670 11 ай бұрын

What's the reason for disallowing an irrational number in the denominator? Obviously there's no problem with that mathematically. Is it just a requirement of the syllabus that the kids you're aiming this at are taught?

@G0LGS 10 ай бұрын

I don't see how the answer with a Square root is any better than the question you started with - I pretty sure if I had been asked the question at school in the 70's I would have been expected to write and answer to a few decimal places and not just as another expression.

@harrymatabal8448 8 ай бұрын

Just loves his voice

@aryusure1943 11 ай бұрын

Just to be clear: radical 100 divided by radical 4 = 5. right? In other words, it's only because we can't divide by an irrational number that we have to go through all that gymnastic. But we would still have to fix this problem if it was for example: radical 8 divided by radical 4. And if I got that method right I would then come up with this answer: 2 times radical 2 / 2. So, at the end of the day if the equation contains radicals that equal irrational numbers we have to use factoring to find the solution.

@mariaolaciregui2128 10 ай бұрын

2/3 square root of 6

@mikechappell4156 11 ай бұрын

I thought this was just simplifying and normalizing. There is no rule against dividing by irrationals.

@russelllomando8460 11 ай бұрын

good one, thanks

@googolian 10 ай бұрын

Cos 45degrees is expressed as1/sqrt2 by the all other teachers except himtan

@markprange2430 9 ай бұрын

Tan 30° = ?

@markprange2430 9 ай бұрын

Diameter of a circle ≡ ?

@mrjesabi 9 ай бұрын

Get to it already

@larrydickenson8922 10 ай бұрын

Any math problem (or physics, geometry, engineering, chemistry, etc) needs to come with a set of instructions such as decimals to 3 places, fractions in the lowest terms, no radicals in the denominator, no fractions under the radical, and on and on and on. Otherwise don’t judge the form of the solution.

@mariaolaciregui2128 11 ай бұрын

I did not place because y could not place de square roof, but I got it. Thank you

@stevenfisher5320 9 ай бұрын

“Prahhms”?.?

@kendavis8046 10 ай бұрын

A spreadsheet yields a very reasonable approximation at each stage of the process.

@drdentin3215 11 ай бұрын

sq rt 3 as denominator goofed me. I stopped there. Walk of shame.

@CyubahiroKeviniel 9 ай бұрын

i like these

@ananiatsadik4934 6 ай бұрын

Boring .

@mariaolaciregui2128 11 ай бұрын

👍👍

@C-man553 10 ай бұрын

Agonizing.

@danielmadden9691 6 ай бұрын

Thanks

@mattseclecticreviews3614 10 ай бұрын

If you are going for the lowest number of factors, the “answer” is 4 / sqrt(6). As others have commented, the idea that “you can’t divide by an irrational number” seems to be a matter of preference. I know of no mathematical rule that makes any answer “invalid”. This problem has many “answers”. No matter how you express the “answer”, the answer will still have an irrational number somewhere. And all answers “resolve” to an irrational number in itself. Just like “you can’t divide by the sqrt(3) because you don’t know it’s value precisely”, try multiplying 2/3 ~= 0.6666… by the sqrt(6). You still can’t get a precise value, only an approximation. If there is a definitive mathematical rule, I’d like to know it. BTW, ChatGPT, although not perfect, does not know of any mathematical rule regarding this subject.

@williamBryan-k2e 9 ай бұрын

I went to eng school. Your numbers have to be in the form of a real number. and it is known that it is an approx - you just have to figure out the error level of observation and put that in - to give you number of digits to the right of the decimal. when you have to calculate flow through a pipe, or get the stresses on a beam - you have to use real number. Bottom line.

@afre3398 11 ай бұрын

The real reason is more about preforming a long division with a irrational number in the denominator is not doable. At least before the electronic calculator days. It is not wrong by any mathematical rule. But your answer will always be an approximation when calculating to get a value. NO matter if you write SQR(8)/SQR(3) or (SQR(8)*SQR(3))/3 It is more a relic from the old days with only using a slide rule. I come from a science/engineering background. And we see radicals in the denominator all the time. But in the modern days of calculators we do not care

@utha2665 11 ай бұрын

Not sure it was a typo, but I saw you cut and paste the same response in another thread. It's perform not preform, I'm leaning towards a typo, the rest of your sentence makes perfect sense. 😊

@moshes218 11 ай бұрын

עעע

@lylegelbach1385 7 ай бұрын

WAY TOO MANY WORDS ... YOU MAKE IT HARDER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE... I WOULD GUESS THAT MOST OF YOUR STUDEBTS EYES GLASS OVER... GET TO THE POINT EARLIER.