eg. 700^2. how do we work it out?and convert it to a whole number. someone pls help!
217486
0.7 * 10^2 or 0.7 E+2 in some calculators,\n\nmeans that you must take your decimal (0.7 in this case) and shift the point a number of times as the exponent says (in this case 2) to the right if it is positive (like in this case) and to the left if it's negative.\n\nIn this case you must move the point two steps right: \nfrom 0.7 to 7.0 (first step) and then to 70. (final answer)\n\nAnother couple of exemples:\n\n.35 E-6 (or 0.35 * 10^-6)\nyou must move the point six steps left:\n0.00000035\n\n0.445 E+10 (or 0.445 * 10^10) \nyou must move the point 10 steps right:\n4450000000.
340961
Remember how powers are defined. 2^3 = 2*2*2. So, a nice feature of exponents is that multiplying numbers adds the exponents = for instance, 2^3*2^4 = (2*2*2)*(2*2*2*2) = 2^(3 + 4) = 2^7\n\nNow, lets say you have the problem 2^7*2^x = 2^4. How would you solve this? By the nice exponent property above, this is the same as 7 + x = 4, so x = -3. But expanding these out, 2^7 = 128, 2^4 = 16, so 2^-3 should be 1/8.\n\nThis is also why anything (except 0) to the 0th power is 1:\n\na^x*a^0 = a^(x + 0) = a^x, so a^0 = 1
117261
The quick way: Move the decimal point to the right the same number of places as the exponent.  Eg: 3.2 x 10^16 is 32,000,000,000,000,000\n\nIf the exponent is negative, move the decimal point that number of places to the left.  Eg:  3.4 x 10^-4 is 0.00034.\n\nIf the exponent is zero, the decimal point stays put.
296125
see this 4^5$32@* ghh4$)--==Y7^6hnyntt%5$$%%44557 b7B7g77&765&yY\nis = to none, now happy
154820
No offense to the others.. but they are going about this all wrong.\n\n2*(y^2)*(x+y) when x=7 and y=8\n     First you do (y^2).. so (8^2) which is 64\n     Then you add (x+y).. so (7+8) which is 15\n     Now rewrite the equation.. so 2*64*15 which is 1920\n\n2*(y^2)*(x+y) when x=5 and y=6\n     First you do (y^2).. so (6^2) is 36\n     Then you add (x+y).. so (5+6) is 11\n     Now rewrite the equation.. so 2*36*11 which is 792
545610
=5.2*5.2*10^-5\n=27.04^10^-5\n=2.704*10^-4
368270
the boundary for rounding off is 5 ( if 5 or above round up if 4 or below round down )\n\n2.49 rounds to 2.5 which rounds to 3 ( if you keep the other digits you are not rounding the number )\n\nif the task is to round to the nearest whole number and show your proof then 2.49 - 2.00 = .49 and 3.00 - 2.49 = .51 so 2 is the answer ( you always round in ONE STEP so you cannot go 2.49 to 2.5 to 3 as you stated )\n\nREMEMBER TO DROP THE EXTRA DIGITS EVEN THE 'CORRECT' ANSWERS FORGOT ( always lol )\n\nHEY IDIOT WITH THE THUMBS DOWN - READ THE ENTIRE ANSWER ( god i hate these idiotic thumbs )
522381
As the hint says, every number is some power of two multiplied by an odd number, or 2^j * s, where s is odd.\nNow, lets say you have written every number in the set T like that. What possible values for s have you come up with? They all have to be <= 2n-1, since the whole number is <= 2n. That means there are precisely n possibilities: 1, 3, .., 2n-1.\nHowever, you have chosen n+1 numbers. So two of those numbers must have the same 's' part.\nBut then if the numbers were 2^a * s and 2^b * s, one of those numbers is a multiple of the other - assuming a>b, (2^a * s)/(2^b * s) = 2^(a-b) (and similarly for a<=b).
525624
Well.. 5 x 2998730787 would give  you 14993653935 and then you divide that by 7888443 and it would give you 1900.7114502823941302485167225015... I would recommend that you round that to probably 1900.7115... I hope this helps and best of luck with math
435310
I prefer "long" multiplication but it doesn't line up as well...\n\n3x^2 + 7x - 6\n* _____x+12\n--------------------  Multiplying term by term\n_____36x^2 + 84X - 72\n3x^3 + 7x^2 - 6x\n--------------------------------  Add term by term\n3x^3 + 43x^2 + 78x - 72   <--  final answer
508381
To multiply fractions, fundamentally the answer is the product of the numerators (top numbers) divided by the product of the denominators (bottom numbers).  For example,\n\n(2/3) * (3/7) = (2*3)/(3*7) = 6/21\n\nWhen any of the fractions contain whole parts such as the "4" in your problem, it does slightly complicate it.  Let me show you 2 slightly different ways to deal with this situation, you pick the one you like:\n\nYour problem can be rewritten as\n\n(4 + 2/7)*(8/11) =\n\n[4 * (8/11)] + [(2/7) * (8/11)] =\n\n(32/11) + (16/77) =\n\n224/77 + 16/77 =\n\n240/77\n\nOr you can do this shortcut, which converts the "4" to "elevenths" - multiple it (the "4") by the denominator (7) then add the numerator (2).  4*7 = 28, plus 2 = 30.  This will be your new numerator.  Now the problem looks like:\n\n(30/7) * (8/11) =\n\n(30 * 8)/(7*11) =\n\n240/77\n\nGet it?
211922
this is probably not a perfect answer but this site may give you some clues.\n\nhttp://www.gomath.com/Questions/question.php?question=4751\n\naltrnatively type 'prove v*v = 2gr*r/s+v0*v0-2gr' into a search engine and see what comes up.
625630
by any chance is this a question from your maths homework? lol :D\n\nI cant work it out myself because to put it simple, im crap at maths.
568619
You got it right so far. But next...to multiply by 1/4...is the same thing as dividing by 4. So take 4x^2/4=x^2 and then -4/4=-1...so you get x^2-1...make sense? I hope I helped...God bless.
552097
So it has to be 70-something.\n\nLet the ones number be x, and then try to solve for x.\n\n70 + x is the number.\n\nIf you switch it around you get 10x + 7.  If you take 18 away from 70 + x you get this number.\n\n70 + x - 18 = 10x + 7\n\n52 = 10x + 7 - x\n\n45 = 9x\n\nx = 5\n\nSo the number is 75.
610926
it would actually be 4.3927  x  10 to the 3rd power.\n\nyou move the decimal over so that there is only one digit before it, and then you get that # and multiply it by 10 to (the amount of spaces the decimal moved to the left) power.\n\nif it is something such as 0.00043927, then it would be 4.3927  x  10 to the -4th power. when you move the decimal to the right, the power is negative.
184783
I hate to tell you, but I don't think there is an algebraic method for arriving at a value for x. Sometimes, this can be the case, in which case all you can do is find a numeric approximation, here around x=1.0587...\n\nI'll see if another user can prove me wrong, but I'm going to go with there's no way to solve this problem using analytic methods.