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.
3/sqrt(8) multiply top and bottom by srt(8) 3*sqrt(8)/8 = 3*sqrt(4)*sqrt(2)/8 = 3*4*sqrt(2) / 8 = 12*sqrt(2)/8 = 3*sqrt(2)/2
Thanks to both!(:
you can not find an exact value because sqrt(2) has no exact value
sqrt(2) is the exact value of sqrt(2)
3*sqrt(2)/3 is the eact value
@zzr0ck3r in rational form or numerical? The question does not specify.
if you can write it with out approximate it is exact
notations are just notations.
nothing about notation, exact is exact.... pi is exact for pi 2/6 is exact for 2/6 66.66666 is not exact for 2/6
this question was given in exact form, the question I think should have been rationalize the denominator. Because we are supposed to give everything as exact unless told otherwise.
3/sqrt(8) is the exact form of 3/sqrt(8)
there are other exact forms such as the one we showed.
pi was assigned a notation, but that does not make it exact. If we assign notations to every irrational number, does that allow us classify them all as exact? For example zeta(2) would be irrational until one classifies it as pi^2 /6
i.e 500/sqrt(4) + 45 "an" exact form of 295
yes, pi is exact. because we know there is no end
what is your definition of exactness?
pi is defined as a ratio of circumference to diameter, that is exact. just because it is not rational does not mean its not exact. The definition of pi has nothing to do with rational vs irrational
I'm asking for YOUR definition of exactness, not one constrained to a single constant.
you can google these things...
Yours, not google's.
if a is in an equivalence relation with a then a is the exact form of a
there are many equivalence relations besides = so we must define what you mean by eact, but this is not about our definitions, it is the definition of exact on the real line
i.e I might call black blue but black is black.
ask your teacher why the exact form of pi is pi.
Or post it as a question and someone else might give you a better explanation because I don't think you are hearing me:)
What I'm saying is, your definition might be true to what you're implying, no argument, but not to what I'm saying. No need to get cocky. You certainly seem to have a limited scope of math. Anyways, I'll leave you to clear out your self.
we write 2 as a number because we define 2 two be something that exibits twoness, do you understand what I'm saying here? We say that 2 is isomorphic to something with twoness. I e they act the same.
lol why am I cocky? why am I limited. I am trying to explain something you asked.....and you say I am not wrong.....but ok. have a good day:)
don't call someone names then erase them, grow up.