Solving a septic equation

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 3 кві 2024
  • In this video, I solved a septic equation by considering a pattern of factors in the difference of polynomials of higher degrees
    Get your t-shirt here:
    shorturl.at/HNUX1
    The Quality of this shirt is impressive. You will also be helping me a lot!
    Colors: Black, Navy Blue, Gray, Red.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 99

  • @SpiroGirah
    @SpiroGirah 2 місяці тому +110

    Algebra is the king of mathematics. I wish I truly spent time developing that aspect of my math before calculus and other things showed up.

    • @ernestdecsi5913
      @ernestdecsi5913 2 місяці тому +8

      I am 70 years old and I am just now realising how much I have always been interested in mathematics. It is a pity that when I was young, UA-cam did not exist and the beauty of mathematics was not so visible.

    • @MrJasbur1
      @MrJasbur1 2 місяці тому

      Yeah, except when algebra has a rule that says that you have to pretend that an equation has more solutions than it does because of multiplicities. They should get rid of that rule. Imaginary numbers may be useful, but I’m not sold on multiplicities being the same.

    • @pedrogarcia8706
      @pedrogarcia8706 2 місяці тому +5

      @@MrJasbur1 it's not that deep. multiplicity just means when you factor the polynomial, the factor is written twice. for all intents and purposes, the equation has 4 solutions, but it still has 6 factors, 2 of them just appear twice.

    • @SalmonForYourLuck
      @SalmonForYourLuck 2 місяці тому +2

      ​@@pedrogarcia8706So that's why he wrote the Imaginery solutions twice?

    • @pedrogarcia8706
      @pedrogarcia8706 2 місяці тому +4

      @@SalmonForYourLuck yeah exactly, if you were to write the factorization of the polynomial, the factors would be (x minus each solution) and the solutions with multiplicity would be repeated. You could also write those factors squared to only have to write them once.

  • @mac_bomber3521
    @mac_bomber3521 2 місяці тому +69

    10:39
    "Those who stop learning, stop living"
    Is that a threat?

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +52

      Only if you feel threatened.

    • @mcvoid7052
      @mcvoid7052 2 місяці тому +8

      Better get to learning.

    • @MangoMan1963
      @MangoMan1963 Місяць тому +5

      "Those who start learning, stop living"
      ~Avg JEE/NEET aspirant

  • @kornelviktor6985
    @kornelviktor6985 2 місяці тому +22

    The easy way to memorize 49 times 7 is 50 times 7 is 350 and minus 7 is 343

  • @adw1z
    @adw1z 2 місяці тому +63

    Technically it’s a hexic (or sextic??) equation as the x^7 on both sides cancel, which means there should be 6 roots in C including multiplicity, as u found

    • @dayingale3231
      @dayingale3231 2 місяці тому

      Yesss

    • @alwayschill4522
      @alwayschill4522 2 місяці тому

      yeah i saw that too... its giving clickbait
      just kidding we love!

    • @erenshaw
      @erenshaw 2 місяці тому +1

      Thank u I was so confused in why there was only 6 solutions

    • @plutothetutor1660
      @plutothetutor1660 2 місяці тому +1

      Factoring an x leads to a quintic equation too!

  • @wavingbuddy3535
    @wavingbuddy3535 2 місяці тому +61

    Guys look at my cool millionth degree polynomial: x¹⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰ = x¹⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰ + x-1 😂

    • @Simpson17866
      @Simpson17866 2 місяці тому +10

      I just solved it in my head :D

    • @adw1z
      @adw1z 2 місяці тому +4

      @@Simpson17866 sorry to be a killjoy but ur polynomial is technically 1 degree only 😭

    • @Simpson17866
      @Simpson17866 2 місяці тому +17

      @@adw1z ... That's the joke.

    • @clown77776
      @clown77776 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@Simpson17866wow crazy.

    • @the-boy-who-lived
      @the-boy-who-lived Місяць тому +1

      After hours of work through trials and errors and using qudralliontic equation and almost proving Riemann hypothesis, I figured out it is 1-x=0

  • @5Stars49
    @5Stars49 2 місяці тому +24

    Pascal Triangle 📐

  • @bobbun9630
    @bobbun9630 Місяць тому +2

    I would have to go check my old abstract algebra textbooks to find the exact way it's described, but if I remember correctly, for any prime p, you have (x+y)^p=x^p+y^p for all x and y when considering over the field Z_p. The trick is to realize that for a prime, all the binomial coefficients in the expansion of the left hand side are a multiple of p, except the first and last (which are always one). Since p~0 in that field, all the extra terms simply disappear. Granted, the solution over the complex numbers given here is the best interpretation of the problem when given without a more specific context, but it's nice to know that there really is a context where the naive student's thought that (x+y)^2=x^2 + y^2 actually does hold.

  • @mitadas9961
    @mitadas9961 Місяць тому +7

    Can anyone please explain why the imaginary solutions are written twice?

    • @picup30296
      @picup30296 Місяць тому +2

      repeated roots due to the square

    • @sadeqirfan5582
      @sadeqirfan5582 18 днів тому

      But what is the point of repeating it if the two repetitions are the same?

  • @spandanmistry4806
    @spandanmistry4806 2 місяці тому +2

    Bro u got to be the best Maths teacher

  • @mahinnazu5455
    @mahinnazu5455 2 місяці тому +3

    Nice math solution.. I see you video everyday. It is really so helpful for me.
    Thank you my Boss.
    Mahin From Bangladesh.

    • @mahinnazu5455
      @mahinnazu5455 2 місяці тому +1

      Sir I hope u can support me to learn Mathematics.I love to do Maths.

  • @ernestdecsi5913
    @ernestdecsi5913 2 місяці тому

    I really like this one!

  • @maharorand507
    @maharorand507 Місяць тому +1

    That s a rly cool explanation but the third is wrong to me : if ( x2 + 7x + 49 )2 equals 0 then x2 + 7x + 49 equals square root of 0 so 0 and x2 + 7x + 49 is ( x + 7 )2 so we replace and then we take out the square of ( x + 7 )2 so x + 7 = 0 and we get the same answer than the last one

  • @Blaqjaqshellaq
    @Blaqjaqshellaq 2 місяці тому +1

    The complex solutions can be presented as (7/2)*e^(i*2*pi/3) and (7/2)*e^(i*4*pi/3).

  • @sajuvasu
    @sajuvasu 2 місяці тому +4

    U can say complex solutions....
    Anyway very informative 😁😁

  • @donwald3436
    @donwald3436 2 місяці тому +7

    The only septic I can solve is figuring out what happens when I flush my toilet lol.

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +6

      Now you have one more

    • @raivogrunbaum4801
      @raivogrunbaum4801 2 місяці тому

      @@PrimeNewtonsisnt it too obvius. by fermat big theorem a^7+b^7=c^7 isnt (positive) integer solutions unless some member is equal to zero.hence x=0 and x=-7

  • @jjjilani9634
    @jjjilani9634 Місяць тому +2

    Why couldn't we use the Pascal triangle for the first part (x+7)^7 ?

  • @pojuantsalo3475
    @pojuantsalo3475 2 місяці тому +7

    I suppose sanitary engineers need to solve septic equations...

  • @trankiennang
    @trankiennang 2 місяці тому +3

    I think i have a general solution to this kind of equation: (x+n)^n = x^n + n^n ( n is natural number, n > 1).
    Divide both side of equation by n^n. We will have (x+n)^n / n^n = x^n / n^n + 1 which is equivalent to (x/n + 1)^n = (x/n)^n + 1.
    Let t = x/n, then the equation will become (t+1)^n = t^n + 1. So now we will focus on solving t
    It is easy to see that if n is even then we just have one solution is t = 0 and if n is odd then t = -1 or t = 0. The main idea here is show that these are only solutions.
    So let f(t) = (t+1)^n - t^n - 1
    Case 1: n is even
    f'(t) = n.(t+1)^(n-1) - n.t^(n-1)
    f'(t) = 0 (t+1)^(n-1) = t^(n-1)
    Notice that n is even so n-1 is odd. Then we have t+1 = t (nonsense)
    So f'(t) > 0. Thus f(t) = 0 has maximum one solution. And t = 0 is the only solution here.
    Case 2: n is odd.
    We have f''(t) = n(n-1).(t+1)^(n-2) - n(n-1).t^(n-2)
    f"(t) = 0 (t+1)^(n-2) = t^(n-2)
    Notice that n is odd so n-2 is odd
    Then we have t+1 = t (nonsense again)
    So f"(t) > 0 which leads us to the fact that f(t) = 0 has maximum two solutions. And t = 0 and t = -1 are two solutions.
    After we have solved for t, we can easily solve for x.

  • @matheusespalaor1757
    @matheusespalaor1757 Місяць тому

    Amazing

  • @Viaz1
    @Viaz1 5 днів тому

    Because x^2+7x+49 is squared can -x^2-7x-49 be used to solve for two other roots rather than repeat?

  • @himadrikhanra7463
    @himadrikhanra7463 Місяць тому

    Eulers equation (a +b)^n= a^n+ b^n....for n=1,2....

  • @SherlockHolmesACD
    @SherlockHolmesACD Місяць тому

    Its more like a hexic (is that the word for 6?) Rather than septic because the x⁷ terms cancel each other

  • @lukaskamin755
    @lukaskamin755 2 місяці тому

    Interesting to do the factoring, I'll try. But I'm curious how such things are obtained, I'd guess that can be done by synthetic division , if you have a clue what to obtain at tĥe end. Not quite obvious. Especially with the 7th degree, that incomplete square squared, looks overwhelming, I'd say 😅

  • @marcelo372
    @marcelo372 Місяць тому

    Tús es o cara. Thank you

  • @mathyyys8467
    @mathyyys8467 2 місяці тому

    Its true for all x in Z/7Z

  • @ThePayner11
    @ThePayner11 2 місяці тому +2

    I generalised this for n is odd. Tried doing it for n is even and couldn't get anywhere 😩
    Solve for x in terms of n if (x + n)^n = x^n + n^n and n ∈ Z^+.
    Case 1 - n = 1
    :
    →x + n = x + n
    There are no valid solutions for x.
    Case 2 - n is odd and n ≥ 3:
    →(x + n)^n - x^n - n^n = 0
    After looking at n = 3, 5, 7 and so on, we notice a pattern:
    →(n^2)*x*(x + n)*(x^2 + nx + n^2 )^((n - 3)/2) = 0
    →x = 0, x = -n
    For x^2 + nx + n^2 = 0
    , where n > 3:
    →x = (-n ± √(n^2 - 4n^2 ))/2
    →x = (-n ± n√3*i)/2
    If anyone can provide a generalisation for n is even, then please reply to my comment 😊

  • @hayn10
    @hayn10 2 місяці тому +1

    Septic ?

  • @frozenicetea3494
    @frozenicetea3494 2 місяці тому

    I wouldve just said by fermas last theorem x can only be equal to 0

  • @xCoolChoix
    @xCoolChoix Місяць тому

    I actually got the first and last term thing right, I just didnt know how to get the numbers in the middle lol

  • @FishSticker
    @FishSticker Місяць тому

    At the very end you say that 49 - 4(49) is negative 3 but it's negative 3(49) aka 147

  • @ayaansajjad6855
    @ayaansajjad6855 Місяць тому

    isn't that equation more simple using pascal triangle ?

  • @tobybartels8426
    @tobybartels8426 2 місяці тому +1

    The 7th root is ∞.

  • @renesperb
    @renesperb 2 місяці тому +1

    It is easy to guess the two solutions x= 0, x = -7 , but one has to show that these are the only real solutions.

  • @jceepf
    @jceepf 2 місяці тому

    A septic equation turned into a sextic equation..... I never thought that algebra so "dirty".

  • @MyOneFiftiethOfADollar
    @MyOneFiftiethOfADollar 2 місяці тому +1

    Would your experience solving this septic equation qualify you to repair our nasty, leaky, smelly septic tank?
    Nice job on choosing a relatively obscure term like septic as it could possibly enhance Search Engine Optimization(SEO), resulting in more page views from wordsmiths!

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +1

      I use that knowledge to fix my septic tank too 😂

  • @edouardbinet7893
    @edouardbinet7893 Місяць тому

    Fermat conjectures

  • @marksandsmith6778
    @marksandsmith6778 2 місяці тому

    put some TCP on it !!!😅😃

  • @sea1865
    @sea1865 2 місяці тому

    Couldnt you just 7th root the entire equation and have all the exponents cancel out?

    • @harley_2305
      @harley_2305 Місяць тому +3

      That doesn’t work because on the right hand side you have x^7 + 7^7. You can’t take a root in this form because that would basically be saying root(x+y) = root(x) + root(y) and we can test that doesn’t work by just plugging in numbers such as 4 and 5. root(4 + 5) = 3 but root(4) + root(5) ≈ 4.236 so by counter example the root of the sums is not equal to the sum of the roots hence you can’t cancel out powers of individual terms by taking the root of the whole thing, the whole thing would need to be raised to a power for you to be able to if that makes sense. Sorry if this didn’t explain it well

  • @williamdragon1023
    @williamdragon1023 Місяць тому +1

    x = 0 ez

  • @user-uk7zm8qg5v
    @user-uk7zm8qg5v Місяць тому +1

    (x+y)^7-x^7-y^7=7xy(x+y)(x^2+xy+y^2)^2  ;
    why (x^2+xy+y^2)^2 It's not a math formula, but there's no explanation.

  • @rishavsedhain8547
    @rishavsedhain8547 Місяць тому +1

    why only six answers? shouldn't there be seven?

  • @noblearmy567
    @noblearmy567 2 місяці тому +1

    I have a septic infection 😂

  • @aurochrok634
    @aurochrok634 2 місяці тому +1

    septic… hm… 😂

  • @Coyto3
    @Coyto3 2 місяці тому

    Believe it or not, I have made a summation for this exact problem but for all n not just 7

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому

      I would be glad if you can share 😀

    • @antonionavarro1000
      @antonionavarro1000 2 місяці тому

      ¿Lo has demostrado solo para los n impares?
      ¿Has demostrado lo siguiente?:
      Si n es un número natural impar, es decir, n=2m+1, con m un número natural cualquiera, se debe cumplir que
      (a+b)^{2m+1}- ( a^{2m+1} + b^{2m+1} ) =
      (2m+1) • (a+b) • (a^2+ab+b^2)^{2m-2}
      Por favor, escribe la demostración. Sería de agradecer que lo hicieras.

    • @Coyto3
      @Coyto3 2 місяці тому

      @@PrimeNewtons I would have to send you the picture. I wrote it out on my board. I think it has one slight error that I need to fix. I can probably send it in a desmos link.

  • @JSSTyger
    @JSSTyger 2 місяці тому

    To me its clear at the start that x must be less than 1.

    • @JSSTyger
      @JSSTyger 2 місяці тому

      The reason I say this is that (x+7)^7 = x^7+7^7+positive number, which is greater than x^7+7^7. So really, I could also argue that x can't even be greater than 0.

  • @googlem7
    @googlem7 2 місяці тому

    multiplicity solution at end has been repeated

  • @anestismoutafidis4575
    @anestismoutafidis4575 Місяць тому

    (x+7)^7=x^7+7^7
    (0+7)^7=0^7+7^7
    7^7=7^77=7
    x=0

  • @dankestlynx7587
    @dankestlynx7587 Місяць тому

    x=0

  • @user-nd7th3hy4l
    @user-nd7th3hy4l Місяць тому

    X=0

  • @sarahlo5084
    @sarahlo5084 2 місяці тому

    Medical person me reads “septic” 🤒

  • @sonicbluster3360
    @sonicbluster3360 Місяць тому

    0

  • @jumpjump-oz2pr
    @jumpjump-oz2pr 2 місяці тому

    Don’t do it like this just brute force it and then synthetic Devine it
    Trust me man trust me

  • @mircoceccarelli6689
    @mircoceccarelli6689 2 місяці тому +1

    ( x + 7 )^7 - ( x^7 + 7^7 ) = 0
    49 x ( x + 7 )( x^2 + 7 x + 49 )^2 = 0
    x = { 0 , - 7 , 7 w , 7 w^2 }
    x^3 - 1 = ( x - 1 )( x^2 + x + 1 ) = 0
    x = { 1 , w , w^2 } , w € C , w^3 = 1
    😊🤪👍👋

  • @Danish53879
    @Danish53879 Місяць тому

    Mei muslman hon hindu nhi hon

  • @Alfi-rp6il
    @Alfi-rp6il 2 місяці тому +2

    Do me a favour: Don't call the non-real solutions 'imaginary'! They are called 'complex', ok. Nevertheless, the 'number' i ist called the 'imaginary entity'. Furthermore, there are 'imaginary numbers'. These are complex numbers without a real part or having zero as real part respectivly.

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +5

      I'll do that. There is that argument that every number is complex. What do you say? Also consider the argument that if a number has an imaginary part, it is altogether imaginary.

    • @Alfi-rp6il
      @Alfi-rp6il 2 місяці тому +2

      @@PrimeNewtons Don't play tricks with words, ok. Mathematics is a science, not part of rhetorics.

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +2

      You did not address my questions. It's no wordplay. You should at least say something about the validity of the claims. Let me repeat then here:
      1. Every real number is a complex number with zero imaginary part.
      2. If the imaginary part of a complex number is not 0, then it is an imaginary number. Not necessarily purely imaginary.

    • @Alfi-rp6il
      @Alfi-rp6il 2 місяці тому +2

      @@PrimeNewtons No. Concerning 2.: A complex number is an imaginary number, when the imaginary part is not 0 and the real part IS ZERO.

    • @PrimeNewtons
      @PrimeNewtons  2 місяці тому +2

      I'm going to pose this question in the community. I need to learn more.