In Java, the relevant lines would be something like this:
for (int number = 1; number <= 10; number++)
System.out.println(number, number*number, number*number*number);
No.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theorem
-- Write down a list of the first ten whole numbers. -- For each one, multiply it by itself, and write the product next to it.
A trick for figuring out squares of larger numbers that is sometimes helpful: if you can write the numbers as the product of two different numbers, then you can square those two numbers and multiply that to find the square of the original. 602 = 102*62 = 100*36 = 3600
36 is the square of 6; 100 is the square of 10; 121 is the square of 11. 71, 62, and 343 are not squares of whole numbers.
How can you have 0 as the difference of two squares? 5^2-5^2?
No.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theoremNo.First of all, you can't write negative numbers as sums of perfect squares at all - since all perfect squares are positive.Second, for natural numbers (1, 2, 3...) you may need up to 4 perfect squares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_four-square_theorem
#include
1. Design an algorithm to compute sum of the squares of n numbers?
-- Write down a list of the first ten whole numbers. -- For each one, multiply it by itself, and write the product next to it.
The prince has a lot of prints that he printed (iI don't know I know it's dumb)
10 CLS 20 FOR n = 1 to 10 30 PRINT n, n^2, n^3 40 NEXT n 50 PRINT: PRINT: PRINT "Touch 'x' to go again, any other key to end." 60 INPUT a$ 70 IF a$ = "X" or a$ = "x" THEN 10 80 END
The simplest way is probably to read the numbers into an array and then prints each element of the array starting at the last one and moving backwards.
A trick for figuring out squares of larger numbers that is sometimes helpful: if you can write the numbers as the product of two different numbers, then you can square those two numbers and multiply that to find the square of the original. 602 = 102*62 = 100*36 = 3600
A programmer can write programs in C, but C can't write anything by itself.
36 is the square of 6; 100 is the square of 10; 121 is the square of 11. 71, 62, and 343 are not squares of whole numbers.
Ask a local attorney.
You mean the calculators should write the programs? Well, they couldn't.