where did i fuck up? i can't see it yet it's definetly not the right direction. i'm supposed to get a 3-2rad(s) in the numerator which doesn't make sense to me.
what would Lennard Euler do...
>>8479601
>mid November
>still on quotient rule
Confirmed for brainlet
You fucked up by making it to university without being able to do the fucking quotient rule.
>>8479999
i know the rule by heart but when i arrange the terms it makes no sense why the answer could be this.
>>8480007
Seriously dude. This is so easy. Do the derivative then simplify.
>>8480007
The top part is supposed to be
Denominator • (numerator)' - numerator • (denominator)'.
>>8480022
but when i do it i get 3-S+sqrt (s).
>>8480025
Uh. What's the full problem then? I'll try it out.
>>8480093
here's the problem. every time i get what i posted for you in my numerator.
Math is so gay.
What the fuck is a quotelt rule
Hope this helps.
>>8479601
My fault, I didn't add the s^2 in the denominator.
>>8479994
Ever using the quotient rule beyond demonstration for the exam
>brainlet
>>8480144
>brute force math
>not helpful
answer is [(2/3)*s^(5/2)] - [1/(s^2)].
instead of having s^2 on the bottom bring it up top as s^-2 and then never again do the quotient rule
>>8479601
OP; factor out a s^-3/2 out of the top and while youre at it combine s+sqrt(s) into s^3/2. once you factor it out you can see that the s^-3/2 and the s^4 (or 2^8/2) returns an s^5/2 on the bottom.
>>8480161
5/2? wouldn't it be 11/2 since you're gonna have S^3/2*S*8/2 in the denominator?
>>8479601
This is a high school junior level math course, yes?
Regardless, here you go. I don't know what you're doing wrong because I don't see where in this problem there's room for errors.
Best of luck graduating.
>>8480340
Here's the problem worked out step-wise with the quotient rule. Compare what you've done and try to find the mistake.
Seriously dude. You're so dumb.
>>8480364
Yes it is you fucking idiot. Do you even understand algebra?
>>8480369
we're about to find out
>>8480364
...
Make 2s^(5/2) the common denominator if you really want it to be exactly the same as the solution given to you.
>>8480369
that's arithmetic not algebra bucko.
>>8480374
It's arithmetic algebra... You're performing calculations with letters.
>>8480376
no it's not it's the study of abstract structures. you're just doing arithmetic with symbols, which while algebra uses, isn't based on. it's analysis of symbols.
>>8480379
My engineering is showing. My formal math knowledge is worse than I thought.
I apologize; you're correct.
So who's right? this guy here >>8480357 ?
>>8480397
OP here. i think all the answers given here are correct. i was just stuck because i don't believe i did the proper quotient rule. i did gf'-fg' instead of fg'-gf'. right?
>>8480403
Yeah, you were doing it wrong. At least you figured out what was going on