Interesting Math Problem.... (1 Viewer)

[qwerty44]

Simplify (x-a)(x-b)(x-c)...(x-z)

 

[deswa1]

I've seen this before, I won't spoil it for others though

 

[qwerty44]

You probably have.

It's a good one though

 

[SpiralFlex]

 

[Carrotsticks]

 

[deswa1]

Nice 4U inside joke here

 

[qwerty44]

Nice 4U inside joke here

Im guessing it's equal to 0 also?

 

[deswa1]

Im guessing it's equal to 0 also?

Yep. Look it up, its called Euler's identity. Its really interesting because it establishes a relationship between exponential functions and trigonometric functions.

 

[Aerath]

As if that was 4U? I don't remember that all.....

 

[deswa1]

I was referring to the RHS. Strictly its not part of the syllabus but its an extension of complex numbers. Essentially <img src="http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" title="e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" />

 

[qwerty44]

 

[AAEldar]

I was referring to the RHS. Strictly its not part of the syllabus but its an extension of complex numbers. Essentially <img src="http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" title="e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" />

The derivation of it is not in the syllabus, however using e instead of cis is certainly a much better representation.

 

[Sanical]

 

[deswa1]

0 as x overpowers lnx. Do you want a proof for that?

 

[zeebobDD]

ahah off the terry lee site i see:L nice

 

[qwerty44]

ahah off the terry lee site i see:L nice

haha yep

 

[D94]

I was referring to the RHS. Strictly its not part of the syllabus but its an extension of complex numbers. Essentially <img src="http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" title="e^{ix}=cosx+isinx" />

No it isn't; it's not extending on anything - it's a universal relationship or identity that we use to simplify cos(x) + isin(x) in writing, ie. a shorthand, but there is a derivation and reasoning. Strictly, the use of 'cis' or rcis(theta) is not in the NSW HSC syllabus too.

 

[Shadowdude]

Simplify (x-a)(x-b)(x-c)...(x-z)

or something like that

yes? yes? yes?

 

[Carrotsticks]

or something like that

yes? yes? yes?

Not quite.

This means we are taking the product from some integer a up to some integer z such that a <= z.

It does not necessarily mean that b = a+1, c=b+1 , ... , z = y + 1.

 

[Shadowdude]

Not quite.

This means we are taking the product from some integer a up to some integer z such that a <= z.

It does not necessarily mean that b = a+1, c=b+1 , ... , z = y + 1.

m8

come on, you know what i meant

why do that