Author Topic: Wow this is completely off topic...  (Read 3693 times)

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« on: December 29, 2005, 03:04:17 pm »
I NEED HELP!

does anyone know how to do this math problem:

22. Find all the values of k such that the expression 3x^2-2x+k=0 has imaginary roots.

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2005, 03:05:22 pm »
I SHOULD HAVE POSTED THIS ON THE OTHER TOPIC...SRY

LimeTwister

  • Guest
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2005, 04:05:16 pm »
if i am thinking correctly you should use the square root of b squared minus (4)(a)(c).

which would give you all numbers k> -1 would be the answer....

EDIT:
uh, I didn't finish working out the problem... and Will actually finished. (obviously, I am not going to be a math major). So, look at Will's.

Will

  • Moderators
  • Fine as dandelions
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
  • Advanced anti-spam registrations filter
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2005, 04:50:43 pm »
3*x^2 - 2*x + k = 0

f(x) = 3*x^2 - 2*x + k

As you recall, there exists a formula to find the roots of all quadratic equations in the form of a*x^2 + b*x + c = 0. The formula is,

x = (-b (+/-)(d)^(1/2)) / (2*a)

where d = b^2 - 4*a*c.

The only place in this formula that would give rise to an imaginary number (and hence, give us a solution with a non-zero imaginary component) is the radical, if and only if the quantity under it is negative. So, f(x) has roots with a non-zero imaginary component where d < 0 (d is negative). We are already given a and b. We'll plug those into the formula for d and substitute that into the inequality I stated above. Then, we'll solve for c, which is k in the original statement of the problem.

a = 3
b = -2
c = k

b^2 - 4*a*c < 0
4 - 4*3*k < 0
-12*k < -4
k > (1/3)

Therefore, f(x) has roots with a non-zero imaginary part where k > (1/3).
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." -Ozzy Osborne

LimeTwister

  • Guest
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2005, 04:55:09 pm »
wouldn't that be 1/3?

where did you get 1/4?

Will

  • Moderators
  • Fine as dandelions
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
  • Advanced anti-spam registrations filter
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2005, 05:05:29 pm »
Made a mistake. Fixed.
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." -Ozzy Osborne

LimeTwister

  • Guest
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2005, 05:08:53 pm »
lol well, at least you finished working it out...i feel rather dumb...

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2005, 06:47:29 pm »
WILL, LIMETWISTER, YOU ALL ROCK...thanks a bunch<3

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2005, 06:51:06 pm »
and just to throw it out there if anyone is really bored:

The accompanying diagram shows a circular machine part that has rods PT and PAR attached at points T, A, and R which are located on teh circe: mTA:mAR:mRT-1:3:5; RA=12 centimeteres; and PA=5 centimeters

Find the measure of angle P in degrees and the find the length of rod PT to the nearest tenth of a centimeter....

i got that P= 80 degrees

i dont know how to find PT?

Will

  • Moderators
  • Fine as dandelions
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
  • Advanced anti-spam registrations filter
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2005, 08:45:27 pm »
Ok... I was gonna do the problem, but I have a question. You said "mTA:mAR:mRT-1:3:5." I read that as a ratio of the three lengths (1:3:5). However, if I do that, mRT = 20 cm, mRA = 12 cm, and mTA = 4 cm. 12+4 = 16 < 20, so that isn't a triangle. Could you explain what you mean?
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." -Ozzy Osborne

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2005, 09:34:19 am »
mTA:mAR:mRT-1:3:5<--- thats a circle. The whole circle is broken up...


idk how i can get the diagram on the site  :(

GeNuInEwAnNaBe69

  • Willing and Able to... Run
  • **
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2005, 09:36:36 am »
Scan it.
"So just remember all you not-so-giant-squids out there, there is no such thing as a little squid, just little nets."
-Jon Stewart

Will

  • Moderators
  • Fine as dandelions
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
  • Advanced anti-spam registrations filter
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2005, 09:46:15 am »
Quote from: "whitehouses81680"
mTA:mAR:mRT-1:3:5<--- thats a circle. The whole circle is broken up...


idk how i can get the diagram on the site  :(


So, mTA and the like denote arcs? The ratio of their lengths is 1:3:5?
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." -Ozzy Osborne

GeNuInEwAnNaBe69

  • Willing and Able to... Run
  • **
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2005, 10:47:44 am »
the answer is 9.2 sam, but i don't know why
"So just remember all you not-so-giant-squids out there, there is no such thing as a little squid, just little nets."
-Jon Stewart

whitehouses81680

  • You aren't tryin'
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Wow this is completely off topic...
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2005, 06:25:21 pm »
what math did u show?