AravindG
  • AravindG
what u mean by amplitue of a complex no?
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
chestercat
  • chestercat
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
AravindG
  • AravindG
hi turing do u knw?
AravindG
  • AravindG
is it the modulus?
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
are you sure you don't mean 'magnitude'?

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

AravindG
  • AravindG
ys
AravindG
  • AravindG
i thonk its modulus
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
yes modulus=magnitude though I can find nothing that says amplitude=modulus so I can't say for sure
AravindG
  • AravindG
try this: tell me general steps to be followed while factorizing quadratic eqns with values of a other than 1 like 2x^2-5x-3
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
it's all about the middle term you want to break it up so you can factor out the GFC of each pair of terms\[ax^2+bx+c=ax^2+nx+mx+c\]where\[n+m=b\]5x can be written as 4x+x 3x+2x 2x+3x x+4x which of these choices above will allow you two factor something out of each pair of terms?
AravindG
  • AravindG
bt product should be -3??ryt?
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
yes, but I'm trying to teach you a technique called "factoring by grouping" that works for quadratics where the coefficient if the x^2 term is not 1
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
so just read my post again and try to answer my question, please :)
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
look at the options on how we can rewrite this expression....
AravindG
  • AravindG
3x+2x?
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
dang I had to reload, sorry...
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
anyway, I dropped th negative, so the options are -5x= -x-4x -2x-3x -3x-2x -4x-x so your choice is that we should break it up as -3x-2x you say?
AravindG
  • AravindG
ys
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
let's try it...
AravindG
  • AravindG
k
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
plugging that in gives\[2x^2-3x-2x-3\]now look at each \(pair\) of terms...\[2x^2-3x\]leaves us only able to factor an x out\[-2x-3\]leaves us only able to factor out a -1 we can do better than that...
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
try breaking the middle term up as\[-2x-3x\]
AravindG
  • AravindG
both r same
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
technically yes, but writing it in this particular way will reveal how to factor this equation that is the nature of the "factoring by grouping" technique
AravindG
  • AravindG
hmm .. iam getting the taste of this method
AravindG
  • AravindG
we take 2x common then
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
exactly
AravindG
  • AravindG
tastes good!!
AravindG
  • AravindG
so we split middle term so that we get 'a'x in one of the parts
AravindG
  • AravindG
turing?
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
yeah I'm sorry... the idea I'm talking about is correct, but I'm pretty sure you are having the same problem that I am with the second pair of terms
AravindG
  • AravindG
lol
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
honestly I learned this method here! lol I always did it by eye before, so I sort of haven't practiced it enough
AravindG
  • AravindG
that was funny
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
so hell, what am I missing? I have to work it backwards....
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
you know what, you had it right the first time I was misrepresenting the goal, sorry again use 3x+2x and take -1 common from the second pair
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
* -3x-2x
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
just take x common for the first pair
AravindG
  • AravindG
hey i got another way
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
I know there are many which are you referring to?
AravindG
  • AravindG
2x(x-3)+(x-3)
AravindG
  • AravindG
hws dat??
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
it's correct and how did you come to that?
AravindG
  • AravindG
simple u see i understud the othr one wont work so i took 2x^2 and -3x and supplied neccessary terms
AravindG
  • AravindG
-6x comes so +x
AravindG
  • AravindG
then -3 supplied hurray!!
AravindG
  • AravindG
hey i learnt to cook!!
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
yeah, I think you're sort of describing the way I see it I do a little trial and error and you figure out which gives you the right thing to factor out
AravindG
  • AravindG
ya not exactly trial and error but i think it will be intutiuve after doing more such problems.anyway i learnt the method thanks
AravindG
  • AravindG
another qn i will post separately come there
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
Like I said the first time, no substitute for practice to develop intuition

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.