วีดีโอ

observe that 2 is a solution

wow , you. didn't check your answer, which is wrong

I got this right in 3 seconds.

It’s in my head.

Log[3,2]+1~1.6309297535714574370995271143427608542995856401318804278706549438386852013809148050611726885494517455613540159383137151949234491469364754136861963933499500359666405847433116774522156125961998518686727928543408495310812088419376092901841859593822187030820289857925687909013131327577187824897548976143800469936236615357701515795825822031192160852692486078488559422009541636442439470940922153959672995129470316164017991631650556607826946991078393362169704832428016969340830893621290994968724320688105585332645182239696751...

9^X=36 X=Log[3,2]+1

X^X^4=64 X=±Surd[8,4]

Common Core strikes again. It was literally deliberately designed to make our kids stupid, generationally stupid.

Is this due to Bill Gates’ common core method of teaching now?

I have a GED and that was easy. Nice explanation.

damn such a good explanation! thank you

either n=0 or m=n

Einstein's dog would solve it 10 times faster than you. 2^3*x = 2^5 => 3*x = 5 => x = 5/3 Why on earth did you even have to spend 10 minutes on this ridiculously easy equations?

What bullshit. My 5 year old got it in 5 seconds.

I solved the first one by writing 448 in binary and seeing it was 111000000, which is 2^8 + 2^7 + 2^6, thus x would be 9.

.25 order of operations with a single operator is left to right. 2 ÷ 2 = 1 1 ÷ 2 = .50 .50 ÷ 2 = .25

in about 5 seconds, trial and error with whole numbers either finds the answer or tells us that we need to dig in and should be the first step imo

anyone with a basic education on math can do this but whatever lmao

pretty easy if you just figure that if x > 3 8^x > 68, only really leaves 2

At 2:10, you have mn = n^2. At this point you should be done. If n = 0, m can be anything and the equation is true. If n is not 0, divide both sides by n, and you have m = n. So your solution space is two lines: n = 0 and n = m. At this point I'm concerned how you could pad this to make a 15-minute video, since you should be done by 2:30.

68 = 64 + 4 = 8^2 + 2^2 x=2.

Write 68 as distinct powers of 2? Cmon man. Can do this for any pos int.

There's a mistake in this solution. You state that because 0 = 0, that means that they're both equal to 0. That's not exactly true. 0 = 0 is always a true statement, so that tells us nothing about it. For instance, let's take a look at if M = 5, and N = 5. That would mean that in our original equation, we have (5 - 5)^2 = 5^2 - 5^2, which means that 0^2 = 25 - 25, and then 0 = 0, therefore true. So, our solutions are either N = 0, or M = N, both of those do not need to be true at the same time for our equation to work. So, either N = 0, and M is undefined. Or M = N, and any value of M or N will work. You also forgot when dividing that is undefined when m = n, because m - n = 0, and you can't divide by 0. So our solutions are n = 0, and m is undefined. Or m = n, and both are undefined. m does not have to be 0.

0.25

I found this to be pretty easy... m=n, doesn't matter what the values are as long as that is the case

Probably wrong, but I'm a guess .25.

Are those 4s or 9s?

Honestly a crap explanation for factoring the cubic. Apart from doing it by inspection (which is a pathetic cop out as a teaching method), it is an obvious case of using the difference of two cubes, splitting -68 into -64 and -4. Also, complex numbers are neither positive nor negative. An exponential resulting in a complex number absolutely has a solution. There are 3 solutions total. 1 real, 2 complex. Your solution to the second problem is in fact not a 'solution' at all in this context. It is a nice simplification of the original expression, and that is it. To frame it as a problem to 'solve' is just wrong. It is useful in teaching exponent laws, and that is it. Not quite that sure you need to be a genius to solve these, but you obviously don't need to be one to make a video about them! Here's the actual solution to the second problem fyi: -52643951747269062439432116572887340400569988569754338678966381730684019278245727585467861095941597659393324347160475969260222668041307886518246660066242575861545551152173550080842125208772019902299727939551297805237187158479880160151174783730098438464835607611679338175434680968622604851462851710991160895019345546002948191756853488386832507787804906833295085928356908138361859376305917295836641962974798507527902487655944971860186653581168461073745346755256483130188461212929747808616824877990167222757548020178676240440102615353675645858089426776938159126439820223262246271493797151829095441436249272980195735928779792935878868512912403451373368413417574747403868971634457233206924396639727466723213346567840389196902204887590727626138650177582378124983097140960494658926633314186628198779588670864469750714354356376786841965248764423791936904731359899168008

Question 1: Solve for x in the equation 9^x = 36 Answer: x = 2 Step-by-step solution: - The equation 9^x = 36 represents an exponential equation, where the base is 9 and the exponent is x. - To solve for x, we need to find the value of x that makes the equation true. - We can rewrite 36 as 6^2 and 9 as 3^2. - Substituting these values into the equation, we get (3^2)^x = 6^2. - Using the rule of exponents that states (a^m)^n = a^(m*n), we can simplify the equation to 3^(2x) = 6^2. - To solve for x, we need to make the bases of both sides of the equation the same. - Since 6 is not a power of 3, we can rewrite 6 as 2*3. - Substituting this value into the equation, we get 3^(2x) = (2*3)^2. - Simplifying the right side of the equation, we get 3^(2x) = 2^2 * 3^2. - Now, both sides of the equation have the same base, 3. - Using the rule of exponents that states a^m = a^n if and only if m = n, we can equate the exponents of both sides of the equation. - Therefore, 2x = 2. - Solving for x, we get x = 1. Key knowledge: - Exponents represent repeated multiplication. - The base of an exponent is the number being multiplied. - The exponent indicates how many times the base is multiplied by itself. - The rule of exponents (a^m)^n = a^(m*n) states that when raising a power to another power, the exponents are multiplied. - The rule of exponents a^m = a^n if and only if m = n states that if two powers with the same base are equal, then their exponents are equal. Tips: - To solve exponential equations, try to rewrite the numbers on both sides of the equation with the same base. - Use the rules of exponents to simplify the equation. - Equate the exponents of both sides of the equation to solve for the variable.

That took about 3 seconds to answer.

(x-4)^4 = x^4. Taking fourth roots we have (x-4)=ax, where a is a 4th root of 1, so a=i,-1,-i,1. Solve the four linear equations, done.

Difference of squares is so much easier (and obvious)

I just did it quickly in my head in a few seconds and got 0.25 anyway which is a 1/4. How do people not know that?

I feel like you did this the long way. I would just find all three cube roots of 27. They are all 120° apart, and the 3 is pretty obvious.

1/4

14

Correction: The stupidest SAT question... No-one would write the problem in that way precisely because most people would get it wrong.

Video title: "Only geniuses can solve this" Video: Math that any calculus student (and probably algebra 2 student) should be able to solve

Whew im glad i got this correct! I did it differently though. I did 2/2=1 then 1/2=.5 then .5/2=.25 .25= 1/4

Wouldn't the answer be 1².

3x3x3x37

I mentally drew a 500 square and a 499 square. Visually it then follows that the remainder should be 500+499=999

999

1/4

It's not an equation, it's an expression, so you don't solve it, you evaluate it. And it's the difference of two squares, a very basic and well-known factorisation: (x+y)(x-y). In summary: not challenging, not exponential, and not an equation.

This is just arithmetic, evaluate it normally.

.250

Not really an equation, just an expression (the first one) Also, u can just use a²-b² = (a+b)(a-b) So it would be (500+499)(500-499) wich is 999

Huh,I got it right and I’m bad at math

2