MHB Expanding and simplifying brackets

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the steps to simplify and expand the expression involving brackets, specifically the equation $4d^2R^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)^2$. The user seeks guidance on obtaining four brackets from this expression, utilizing the difference of squares method. Key transformations include expressing the equation as $(2dR)^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)^2$ and factoring it into two products. The process involves multiple steps of factoring and rearranging terms, ultimately leading to a final expression of four distinct factors. The user expresses gratitude for assistance in this mathematical endeavor.
Maggie_s2020
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, I have been trying to solve the top line equation to get the result (the bottom line). I am searching for a clue (the steps) on how to obtain those four brackets as a result.
Screenshot 2020-12-06 at 16.41.07.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
factoring the expression within the radical just involves the difference of squares ...

$4d^2R^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)^2$

$(2dR)^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)^2$

$[2dR -(d^2-r^2+R^2)] \cdot [2dR + (d^2-r^2+R^2)]$

$[-(d^2-2dR+R^2) + r^2] \cdot [(d^2+2dR+R^2) - r^2]$

$[r^2-(d-R)^2] \cdot [(d+R)^2 - r^2]$

$[(r-d+R)(r+d-R)] \cdot [(d+R-r)(d+R+r)]$

multiply the two middle factors by (-1) ...

$(-d+r+R)(-d-r+R)(-d+r-R)(d+r+R)$
 
Last edited by a moderator:
skeeter said:
factoring the expression within the radical just involves the difference of squares ...

$4d^2R^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)$

$(2dR)^2 - (d^2-r^2+R^2)^2$

$[2dR -(d^2-r^2+R^2)] \cdot [2dR + (d^2-r^2+R^2)]$

$[-(d^2-2dR+R^2) + r^2] \cdot [(d^2+2dR+R^2) - r^2]$

$[r^2-(d-R)^2] \cdot [(d+R)^2 - r^2]$

$[(r-d+R)(r+d-R)] \cdot [(d+R-r)(d+R+r)]$

multiply the two middle factors by (-1) ...

$(-d+r+R)(-d-r+R)(-d+r-R)(d+r+R)$
THANK YOU SO SO SO MUCH! BLESS YOU!
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top