I agree. Since the problem restricts answers to positive integers, just starting with 2 and checking each possibility is way quicker then the long method shown in this video.
@@aisolutionsindia7138 :You are right. 3 is here an "evident solution" but Is it unique? It is not a big deal to demonstrate that. Knowing that the square function is increasing for natural numbers we just need to verify that the result is >35 for n=4 and
I have been to a Russian Orthodox wedding, complete with high mass, in traditional Russian Liturgy, accompanied by a full choir and orchestra playing culturally appropriate antique instruments, and, of course, all in the wedding party were wearing ethnically perfect, hand-embroidered, 18th century regalia complete with jewelry of the period, and it was less complicated than his solution to this equation! 🙀😹
I have to agree with people saying that the solution is much simpler by inspection. Since n is a positive integer (as stated in the question (Z+)), it’s quite simple to verify that 3 solves the problem, and it is unique for positive integers.
I don´t agree completely with the assumption that (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 1*35. Why not (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 5*7 or (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 7*5, for example. We can not force a result for an equation!!!
How long did that take? I did it in my head instantly and fast-forwarded to the end of the video to check if my solution was correct. It was, and I'm no mathematician.
Нетрудно заметить ,что значение 3 удовлетворяет уравнению.Рассмотреть случаи,когда n больше 3 и когда n меньше 3 и на основе сложения неравенств с одинаковыми знаками заключаем,что лнвая часть иои больше правой или меньше правой.И все подобные неравенства легко решаются.
Three, by inspection. Still, this puzzle and its TH-cam have a valuable lesson for it: some fools are easily distracted, perhaps carrying with them the thought that they are doing something rarified or worthwhile as they go. The spelling gadget wants me to spell it with an e, "rarefied," which strikes me as inane. Checking with Google, I'm a bit surprised to find that Oxford want the idiotic "rarefied," which would obviously be the nonexistent word pronounced rair-fide, while the often shoddy Merriam-Webster crew agree with me on "rarified."
It makes absolutely no sense assuming that n will be divisible by 3. This is a wild guess. Unless you already know! Right? Then you make further guesses like the 1 * 35...
Dlm memecahkan masalah tentu dicari yg termudah. Untuk kasus soal ini metode menebak nilai dg mengujinya tentu lebih singkat. Matematika adl alat bantu untuk memudahkan solusi masalah bukannya mempersulit..!!!
This unnecessarily complicated resolution risks disgusting students. Why don't you show a simpler way to solve this equation? It could be done in few rows: 3 is here an "evident solution" but Is it unique? It is not a big deal to demonstrate that. Knowing that the square function is increasing for natural numbers we just need to verify that the result is >35 for n=4 and
Why is 1 = 3/3? Why not n/n? Because you wanted it to be so? Or did you suppose that n maybe is equal 3? How? Then you could just suppose that 3^3 + 2^3 = 35. Why did you suppose that 1 is equal to 3/3? Huh?
Assume n is an integer. A reasonable guess because the question is _obviously contrived_ using an integer n. Then: Try n = 1. 3 + 2 < 35. Try n = 2. 9 + 4 < 35. Try n = 3. 27 + 8 = 35. Bingo! Why all the nonsensical messing about with algebra for _15 minutes_ ??
Amazing sir
Tenkyou very much
Achei fantástico!
Intuitively, ask, what two perfect cubes, when added up, equal 35. The answer is 27 and 8. 27 is 3^3 and 8 is 2^3. X=3. Don't overthink things.
I agree. Since the problem restricts answers to positive integers, just starting with 2 and checking each possibility is way quicker then the long method shown in this video.
Plus, in order to know to multiple n by 3/3 at 0:30 , you have to already know the n = 3.
you have to still prove thats the only solution otherwise its a big fat 0 in a descriptive test
@@aisolutionsindia7138 :You are right. 3 is here an "evident solution" but Is it unique? It is not a big deal to demonstrate that. Knowing that the square function is increasing for natural numbers we just need to verify that the result is >35 for n=4 and
Yep lol... Figured it out in my head lol
Бравооо
27+8=35 3^3+2^3=35 n=3
Very good!
I have been to a Russian Orthodox wedding, complete with high mass, in traditional Russian Liturgy, accompanied by a full choir and orchestra playing culturally appropriate antique instruments, and, of course, all in the wedding party were wearing ethnically perfect, hand-embroidered, 18th century regalia complete with jewelry of the period, and it was less complicated than his solution to this equation! 🙀😹
Thanks to you dear brother, and, always, add a beautiful song so that things become easy !
I have to agree with people saying that the solution is much simpler by inspection. Since n is a positive integer (as stated in the question (Z+)), it’s quite simple to verify that 3 solves the problem, and it is unique for positive integers.
I don´t agree completely with the assumption that (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 1*35. Why not (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 5*7 or (X+Y)*(X^2-YX+Y^2) = 7*5, for example. We can not force a result for an equation!!!
Why unnecessary extra sound ?
3*n+3*n>35. N>=3, 3*n
How long did that take? I did it in my head instantly and fast-forwarded to the end of the video to check if my solution was correct. It was, and I'm no mathematician.
3
Why not:
3^n + 2^n = 27 + 8
3^n - 27 + 2^n- 8 = 0
3^n - 3^3 + 2^n - 2^3 = 0
n - 3 + n - 3 = 0
2n = 6
n = 3
Good folk music
n2.
If n is a positive integer, n=3.
Решается в уме за две минуты! Подбором чисел , 2 - не подошло, а три - получилось ! Ура 👍
А где решение, что данный ответ единственное решение?
Это не математика, получается, а угадывание.
That’s exactly how I did it! In two seconds! 😺
n = 3.
27 + 8 = 35.
😊 Try and error with 1, 2 and 3. It can be solved in 20 seconds.
Yeah, but that's missing the point. Just about anyone can guess a trivial case.
n ∈ Z+ => n35, test n=1,2,3 =>n=3
Нетрудно заметить ,что значение 3 удовлетворяет уравнению.Рассмотреть случаи,когда n больше 3 и когда n меньше 3 и на основе сложения неравенств с одинаковыми знаками заключаем,что лнвая часть иои больше правой или меньше правой.И все подобные неравенства легко решаются.
Hello, i try to resolve 3^n+2^n=13, here n=2 but cant find algebraic solution, can you get the solution.
Three, by inspection.
Still, this puzzle and its TH-cam have a valuable lesson for it: some fools are easily distracted, perhaps carrying with them the thought that they are doing something rarified or worthwhile as they go.
The spelling gadget wants me to spell it with an e, "rarefied," which strikes me as inane. Checking with Google, I'm a bit surprised to find that Oxford want the idiotic "rarefied," which would obviously be the nonexistent word pronounced rair-fide, while the often shoddy Merriam-Webster crew agree with me on "rarified."
Fifteen minutes to explain a solution that took me under 5 seconds of mental math!?
agreed
Olympiad Math? Sure?
n=3
3^3+2^3=27+8=35
Unfathomable to most people except maths professors.
You do not need to be a maths professor: I disagree.
It makes absolutely no sense assuming that n will be divisible by 3. This is a wild guess. Unless you already know! Right?
Then you make further guesses like the 1 * 35...
It’s crap like this that turns young students against learning proper mathematics! 😾
Dlm memecahkan masalah tentu dicari yg termudah.
Untuk kasus soal ini metode menebak nilai dg mengujinya tentu lebih singkat.
Matematika adl alat bantu untuk memudahkan solusi masalah bukannya mempersulit..!!!
Could simply be solved by taking log of both sides.
What of the right side is a number way bigger than 35? Still making every assumption?
N=3
This unnecessarily complicated resolution risks disgusting students. Why don't you show a simpler way to solve this equation? It could be done in few rows:
3 is here an "evident solution" but Is it unique? It is not a big deal to demonstrate that. Knowing that the square function is increasing for natural numbers we just need to verify that the result is >35 for n=4 and
why 3d power, why not 2d ?
Change the music! Just too much.
this music is extremely annoying
Completely unnecessary solution. This kind of problem is known to be solved by summing powers; 3^3 +2^3=35, n=3.
"solved by summing powers" Is that higher math? Sometimes college-level algebra is needed.
Solved by inspection. Sometimes « lower math » is faster
You have to get it practically
@@MustefaKaso yes, an analytic solution is desirable
2^n≤3^n; y
3^3+2^3=27 +8=35
1 плюс 1 не равно 35
3 плюс 2 не равно 35
9 плюс 4 не равно 35
27 плюс 8 равно 35
Ответ n=3
onel look at the equation instantly gives the answer as 3 there is no need for an elaborate the steps to arrive at the solution
There is a need.... think about it.
Why is 1 = 3/3? Why not n/n? Because you wanted it to be so? Or did you suppose that n maybe is equal 3? How? Then you could just suppose that 3^3 + 2^3 = 35. Why did you suppose that 1 is equal to 3/3? Huh?
Who said that x and y must be integers ?
Assume n is an integer. A reasonable guess because the question is _obviously contrived_ using an integer n.
Then:
Try n = 1. 3 + 2 < 35.
Try n = 2. 9 + 4 < 35.
Try n = 3. 27 + 8 = 35. Bingo!
Why all the nonsensical messing about with algebra for _15 minutes_ ??
А если 3^n+2^n=35,1?
Ок
Good
3
What's happening here
Phương Pháp không thuyết phục
N =2 is wrong
n is 3 hhhhh
無聊
n=7
n=3
3
N=3
n=7
3
3
n=3
n=7
n=3
n=3
n= 3