6 radical 2
2√20 - 3√7 - 2√5 + 4√63 = 2√(4 x 5) - 3√7 - 2√5 + 4√(9 x 7) = 4√5 - 2√5 - 3√7 + 12√7 = 2√5 + 9√7
36
2 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 13
4√5 + 4√5 = 8√5.
2 radical 30
-2 √5 + 3 √5 = (-2 + 3) √5 = 1 √5 = √5
Here is an example, radical 20 plus radical 5. Now radical 20 is 2(radical 5) so we can add radical 5 and 2 radical 5 and we have 3 radical 5.
Well, darling, radical 5 plus 2 radical 5 is simply 3 radical 5. It's like adding apples to apples, just with more math and less fruit. So, go ahead and flaunt that math prowess like a boss!
2 times radical 5 or about 4.472135955
6 radical 2
2√20 - 3√7 - 2√5 + 4√63 = 2√(4 x 5) - 3√7 - 2√5 + 4√(9 x 7) = 4√5 - 2√5 - 3√7 + 12√7 = 2√5 + 9√7
76
1 squared radical 40 is equal to 1 squared radical (4 x 10), and this become 2 squared radical 10. By adding 2 squared radical10 with 3 squared radical 10 we get 5 squared radical 10.
36
2 3/5 = 13/5 as a radical: √132/52 = √169/25 because √169/25 = √169/√25 = 13/5 = 2 3/5
5 radical 3 is just a number.So, asking this is the same as asking 'What are some equivalents to 3?' One could answer 2 * 3 / 2. But this reduces to 3.The situation is the same for your question. One could offer some multiple of 5 radical 3 as an answer but, being a multiple, it would reduce to 5 radical 3.radical 3 is approximately 1.732 but not exactly 1.732 so one cannot say, for instance, that 5 radical 3 = 5 (1.732) = 8.660. In fact, there is not way of expressing radical 3 with a finite number of decimal places. So no-one can write radical 3 = 1.732.... exactly.5 radical 3 is the best one can do.