Je bent je ingevulde velden bij deze pagina aan het verwijderen. Ben je zeker dat je dit wilt doen?
You are erasing your filled-in fields on this page. Are you sure that is what you want?
Nieuwe Versie BeschikbaarNew Version Available
Er is een update van deze pagina. Als je update naar de meest recente versie, verlies je mogelijk je huidige antwoorden voor deze pagina. Hoe wil je verdergaan ?
There is an updated version of this page. If you update to the most recent version, then your current progress on this page will be erased. Regardless, your record of completion will remain. How would you like to proceed?
This section gives the properties of exponential expressions. Most of these should be
familiar, although we go into slightly more details as to how and why these properties
hold in some cases.
First we start by explicitly stating the properties that you need to know. But as
usual we will try to explain the properties in a way that should (hopefully) make
them clear and ‘obvious’, which should help you learn them rather than memorize
them.
You can watch a video on this content here:
_
For each of the below, are any real numbers.
. Similarly .
, and similarly . Moreover if then .
. However, if then cannot be combined in any ‘nice’ way, and neither can .
(That’s not to say they can’t be combined at all, there are ways to do
so and there are reasons to do so as we will address later. However, these
are ‘artificial’ ways to combine these terms that are used in very specific
settings and are not generally considered as ‘simplifying’ outside of those
specific settings. )
For , (ie is a whole positive number bigger than one), then . More
generally, for non-zero integers, .
The above are the important ‘properties’ of exponents, but since exponents are
essentially just a notation, we should be able to “prove” each of these properties
explicitly without actually memorizing any of them. That is what we aim to
do/explain next. This may seem like a section you want to skip over, but I strongly
urge you to read it as it will (theoretically) make each of the above properties
“obvious” and help avoid the memorization which can be easy to forget/mix
up.
Mechanical Properties of Exponents Explained.
Many of these ‘explanations’ will be very short as they are fairly immediate
or obvious on their own. Some of them will involve a more lengthy (and
insightful/worthwhile) explanation. Again I urge you to carefully read each of them
as the ‘obvious’ ones will be short and thus not take much time to read, whereas the
longer ones will contain content worth reading.
This property follows just from the notation. In fact one can see this by simply
writing out what each of these mean:
It’s easier to see what is happening if we assume , but by the (as yet unproven)
property about negative exponents we can see that the property works even if . For
now assume for the sake of demonstration (so ).
Again, by writing out the definition for each of these we get our result.
and
This is the first property that really deserves explanation, as it is generally
considered a ‘mystery’ that students memorize, but the reason it is true turns out to
be fairly obvious when one returns to the repeated-multiplication idea. Moreover the
reason why the negative exponents work this way also sheds light on why something
to the zero power is one; it’s not by definition, it’s actually because of how powers
work!
First we start by writing out a few consecutive exponents according to the
definition.
If we look at the exponents above, we can see that if we increase the exponent by one,
that corresponds to multiplying by the base (ie, multiplying by another ). This is
usually how one learns exponents, but it is insightful to consider what it means to go
the other direction, ie decreasing the exponent by one. In that case we can
see that decreasing the exponent by one corresponds to dividing by the
base.
So, if we want to determine what should be, we can start by going ‘up’ one exponent
level, and then use the division idea to decrease the exponent. So we would have:
Thus we can see that, almost regardless of the base (There is one particular value
of that is concerning here, which is if . In this case is undefined, which is why we
specify that in our list of properties! ) when we have it must equal , because it is a
number divided by itself.
Moreover, if we keep subtracting values from the exponent to get into negative
exponents, that corresponds to continuously dividing by the base. For example; if we
have that corresponds to starting with and dividing by twice (which we can do by
multiplying by ), which gives: Similarly, replacing the ‘’ exponent in the above by ‘’
we can see why the negative exponent property, not only is what it is, but in fact why
it must be what it is.
For this we need a bit more explanation. Here the usual definition doesn’t work, since
trying to write out a fractional number of terms being multiplied doesn’t really make
sense. Instead we want to return to the idea that a power and a root should ‘undo’
each other. Specifically, if we take the ‘’ power of it should return . So, if
we want to represent the radical part of as some exponent (let’s say the
exponent that represents the radical is some value ‘’ for a moment. That is,
suppose for ‘some’ unknown ) we have that Thus using a property we will
discuss below, we have that , which means that (the value that is suppose
to represent the “ root”) must, in fact, be , which is what we wanted to
show.