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 introduces two types of radicands with variables and covers how to simplify them... or not.
You can watch a video on this content below:
_
There are two main types of radicands we wish to distinguish here. (I will note again that distinguishing these radicands as
we will in this section is a pedagogical choice, meaning that the mathematical community (and future courses) will not distinguish
between these two, but I find it extremely useful to do so to help students know what they can (and can’t) do to simplify radicals.)
Type 1 Radical: Type one radicals have radicands that are entirely factored, meaning that each term of the radicand is
multiplied against the other terms of the radicand. Specifically, there are no addition or subtraction signs between terms
in the radicand. For example: The radical is a type one radical because each of its terms are multiplied against the other terms. Specifically, the
only addition or subtraction symbols are inside terms that are multiplied against (all) the other factors in the
radicand.
Type 2 Radical: Type two radicals have radicands that are not entirely factored, meaning that there are terms in the radicand
that are separated by addition or subtraction symbols. For example: The radical is a type two radical because not all its terms are multiplied against the other terms. Specifically, there
are terms that are being added or subtracted to the other terms (in this case, the is a term being subtracted from the other
term(s) ). Note: It may be possible to factor/manipulate a type two radical into becoming a type one radical. This is discussed
below.
We saw in the previous section how to simplify radicals where the radicand is entirely numeric. Obviously numeric radicals can
always be made into type one radicals (if you have a radical that looks like two constants being added or subtracted, simply
perform the addition or subtraction until the radicand is a single number). Typically the best way to deal with numeric radicals is
to simplify them as far as possible in order to determine what kind of simplification we can do in the overall expression or equation
where the radical is found.
Since numeric radicals can always be forced into being a type one radical, the real difficulty only begins when we are using
non-numeric radicals; specifically radicals where the radicand includes variables.
Radicands with Variables
We have determined how to tackle radicals when they have purely numeric radicands, but what do we do when our alphabet starts
making appearances in the radicand? As one might expect, things get more difficult, although perhaps not always for the reasons
one might think.
It is worth a note that radical expressions should be treated as an unbreakable ‘term’ when they are separated by addition or
subtraction. Thus the only way to put two radical expressions together that are separated by addition or subtraction is if they are
exactly the same radical expression. Consider the following example:
Simplify the expression In this example we will simplify the given radicals using techniques that will be discussed in the
sections to follow. Like the first example of this chapter, it’s ok if you don’t immediately follow how some of the computations are
done, but you should return to this example once you have finished the chapter to verify that you understand every single step at
that point. Specifically, at this point, the appearance of the absolute value may be unclear, but the rest of the mechanics should be
familiar.
First we note that the second radical, is a numeric radical and, since is prime, it is already in it’s simplest form (there are no
perfect squares to factor out). Moreover, since the current (first and second) radicals are not absolutely identical we cannot
‘merge’ or ‘factor’ or otherwise ‘simplify’ this difference of radicals currently. So there is some work to be done first.
The key is to observe that the first radical can be simplified. Specifically; Now we can observe that the remaining radical piece has
a radicand of , so the radical portion of the simplified form of the first term () is exactly identical to the radical portion of the
second term. This is what allows us to do the following (the last equality is a result of factoring out from both terms);
So we conclude that the simplified (or factored) form of the original expression is .
In the next two tiles we will look at what we can do with Type 1 and Type 2 radicals individually, and then we will discuss how to
deal with more complex equations that may have one or both of these types at the same time.