answersLogoWhite

0


Want this question answered?

Be notified when an answer is posted

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How do solve the equation of 26x 74?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Math & Arithmetic

How do you solve 38 equals 26x - 7x?

38 = 26x - 7x 38 = 19x (38/19) = x 2 = x


26x equals 156 how much is x?

26x = 156 Divide both sides of the equation by 26 to find the value of x: x = 6


What is the solution of 20x 2-26x plus 8 0?

The answer to this equation would be 5. This is a math problem.


X2 plus 26x plus?

(x2 + 26x +) : syntax error.x2 + 26x


What number is needed to complete the square x2 plus 26x equals 0?

I'm hearing x2 + 26x + ? = 0 where you want to know what the ? would be for a perfect square binomial.I would be remiss if I did not mention that this is not the best method for solving this equation. First, the best method:x2 + 26x = 0First, just factor the x from the left side:x(x + 26) = 0Then x = 0 or -26. Problem solved, two answers.If you really want to complete the square, you can still solve it, but it takes a bit longer. Take half of the middle number (26) which is 13 and then square it. 132=169. That is your question mark. Don't forget to add it to the 0 to keep the equation balanced:x2 + 26x + 169 = 0 +169To finish solving:(x + 13)2 = 169x + 13 = +/-13x = -13-13 or x = 13-13x = -26 or x = 0. Same answer as above. A heckuvalot more complicated.* * * * *While all of the above is true, completing the squares is a very powerful way of solving general quadratic equations. It is implicitly the same as using the quadratic formula.The question can arise when you want to solve an equation such asx2 + 26x + 25 = 0The first step is to rewrite it asx2 + 26x = -25Now complete the square on the left, by adding 169 to both sides.x2 + 26x + 169 = -25 + 169 x2 + 26x + 169 = 144(x + 13)2 = 12Take square rootsx + 13 = ± 12so x = -13 ± 12so that x = -1 or x = 25The number 25 was chosen deliberately so that, after adding 169 there would be a perfect square. But the method works equally well otherwise.*****That is all true, but not the original equation and certainly not the most efficient way to solve it. I never claimed "completing the squares" was not "a very powerful way of solving general quadratic equations". I simply stated, "I would be remiss if I did not mention that this is not the best method for solving this equation."