How do you find:
x(x^2-3x-4)-(x^2-1)^2/(x^2-1)^2)=0
?
littlefreak Thurs 16/10/08 19:46
To subscribe to this question you need to
sign in to the AnswerBank or register
if you are not already a member. All you need is a valid email address to register.
|
|
....you can't .... you've missed out a left bracket :o(
|
|
|
Well I doubt you'll be reading this as it looks like it was last night's homework
But
assuming that the additional ( goes just after the 4)-
that last term just cancels making
x(x^2-3x-4)-1=0
which is x(x+1)(x-4)-1=0
Now you're sure that the question is =0 not =-1 or that there's not another term that gets rid of the -1
Because if so then it's easy and you just take the roots from the above ie 0, -1 and 4 which is more what I'd expect from a school question.
If not and you're sure you're meant to be soving cubics check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubic_equation
and cardano's formula
And please don't call us boffins - it's a term people use to describe people who are cleverer than them when they want to demean them because they're feeling insecure
And that's not nice when you're asking for help
|
|
|
You really can be touchy sometimes, jake!
This is a shame because you come up with some brilliant answers, and sensibly contribute to lively debates on many controversial subjects.
Where on earth did you get the notion that the term “boffin” was derogatory? Is this yet another example of legitimate English words which have been ruled out of order by the chattering classes (e.g. “fat”, “homosexual”, “disabled”)? Or is it an example of a word that has had its proper meaning abandoned and a new meaning (known only to a few people) substituted (e.g. "gay", "cool", "wicked").
I had always thought of the term boffin as one of endearment. It conjures up an image (in my mind anyway) of an obsessive scientist, devoted to his or her work and modestly brilliant. In short, someone who should be admired. I would never have considered it derogatory and have never considered it to be used only by the insecure.
A couple of extracts from an article I have found about boffins:
“Boffins are an almost uniquely British creature, and are a national treasure...”
“The boffin is a person to be celebrated, rather than mocked, because they - as engineers - are responsible for imagining and then building the world all non-boffins inhabit.”
Could it be, though, as I touched on, that colloquial use has led to your view of boffins? Again, from the same article:
“...though, the word boffin is sometimes used interchangeably with nerd or geek...”
If so, the colloquial usage should be challenged at every opportunity. There have been enough examples of English words being hijacked for illegitimate usage and “boffins” should not join them!
|
|
|
The word boffin draws on images of very clever people marred by a lack of social skills and an inability to grasp the "real world"
As you say nerd and geeks are the American version.
It's a way of saying "oh they're clever BUT..."
It's very patronising
Perpetuating this image deters kids from studying and exceling at science at school and University.
It's part of a very British anti-intellectualism where it's not "the done thing" to be too clever.
Yes we need to celebrate our intellectual achievements but not with the slightly eccentric twist that news media have to try to find to put onto things.
Scientists are not all wheel-chair bound or Patrick Moore types.
We are not boffins!
|
|
|
Point take, jake. You could be right.
It's a great pity that in this country gifted people are derided almost to the point of ridicule. Perhaps it's all part of the great "levelling exercise" that has been undertaken over the past thirty years or so. It seems to have worked.
|
|
|
Question Author
I found it. I went wrong the question just before! Woops. I really shouldn't leave maths until 9o/clock.
Thanks anyway peeps.
|
|
Free Advertising | Credit Counseling | Guitar Books | Mortgage insurance | Loans
