1
n squared x n n x n x n = n cubed n x n = n squared n squared x n = n cubed
Oh, dude, adding n squared plus n squared is like adding apples to apples, you know? It's just like, you take two n squared terms and you add them together to get 2n squared. It's not rocket science, man. Just double up those n squares and you're good to go.
10 - 52 = -15
(n2 + 2n - 1) (n2 + 2n - 1) = n4 + 2n3 - n2 + 2n3 + 4n2 - 2n - n2 - 2n + 1 = n4 + 4n3 + 2n2 - 4n + 1 try with n = 5: (5 squared + 10 - 1) squared = 34 squared = 1156 with formula (5^4) + (4 *(5^3)) + (2 * (5^2)) - (4 * 5) + 1 = 625 + 500 + 50 - 20 + 1 = 1156
Oh, dude, N squared is just a fancy way of saying you multiply a number by itself. So, like, if N is 3, then N squared is 3 times 3, which equals 9. It's like math's way of saying, "Hey, let's make this more confusing than it needs to be."
Take any positive integer n. If you square it, and subtract 1, you get (x squared - 1). If you take (n - 1) and (n + 1), and multiply them together, you get n squared - n + n - 1, which is the same as (n squared - 1).
n squared x n n x n x n = n cubed n x n = n squared n squared x n = n cubed
This is an immediate consequence of the Fundemental Theorem of Arithmetic. The "only if" part of the assertion is trivial because if n = 3k then n squared = 3(3k^2). If we know that every number can be written as the product of primes in exactly one way, then it follows that p is in the prime factorization of AB only if p is in the prime factorization of A or p is in the prime factorization of B. Take p = 3 and A = B = n, and that proves the theorem. The Fundemental Theorem is really not necessary in proving this assertion; an alternate proof using "enumeration of cases" is possible. If 3 does not divide n then n is of the form 3k+1 or 3k+2 for some integer k. It is easy to check that (3k+1)^2 and (3k+2)^2 are both not divisible by 3.
n = 5 245 * 5 = 1225 which is 35 squared
Oh, dude, adding n squared plus n squared is like adding apples to apples, you know? It's just like, you take two n squared terms and you add them together to get 2n squared. It's not rocket science, man. Just double up those n squares and you're good to go.
If that's n squared, the multiples are n squared, 2 n squared, 3 n squared and so on. If that's n + 2, the multiples are n + 2, 2n + 4, 3n + 6 and so on.
10 - 52 = -15
Simple equation lad. In your example, you said n=4 and x= n squared + n - 1 + (n-2)squared + (n-3)squared. You simply write n²+n-1+(n-2)²+(n-3)² I hope that is what you mean by what you say. P.S. To get the to the power of sign, hold alt and press 0178 for ², and 0179 for ³
To determine the least positive integer ( n ) such that ( 210 ) divides ( n! ), we first factor ( 210 ) into its prime components: ( 210 = 2 \times 3 \times 5 \times 7 ). For ( n! ) to be divisible by ( 210 ), ( n ) must be at least as large as the largest prime factor, which is ( 7 ). Thus, the least positive integer ( n ) such that ( 210 ) divides ( n! ) is ( n = 7 ).
A number that divides n is called a "divisor" of n.
It is 2n^3 + 7n^2 - 13n + 3
n^2 + 5n = 0Where there is no constant term, then there is one monomial and one binomial factors. In this case the monomial is n and the binomial is (n + 5) So n*(n + 5) = 0 which leads to the solutions n = 0 or n = 5.