3
$\begingroup$

How would you explain the principle why $x(x+2)(x-3)$ is not $x^2+2x(x-3)$ but $(x^2+2x)(x-3)$? This may involve the fundamentals of eliminating parenthesis.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So people can better help you, do you understand why $x(x+2)=x^2+2x$? $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Nov 3 '14 at 16:49
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry I should have included I just want to generalize this concept, instead of trying to attempt understand it explicitly. $\endgroup$ – Bright Nov 3 '14 at 16:53
  • $\begingroup$ In that case Vladimir's answer below should be useful. $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Nov 3 '14 at 16:54
  • $\begingroup$ Not a proof, but consider looking at what happens when $x$ is some specified number. For example, suppose $x=5.$ Then $x(x+2)(x-3)$ is the product of $5$ and $7$ and $2,$ which equals $70.$ However, $x^2 + 2x(x-3)$ is the sum of $5^2 = 25$ and $(2)(5)(2) = 20,$ which equals $45.$ Finally, $(x^2 + 2x)(x-3)$ is the product of $5^2 + (2)(5) = 25 + 10 = 35$ and $5-3 = 2,$ which equals $70.$ In particular, note that in the original version, it's $35$ that gets multiplied by $2,$ which the $(x^2+2x)(x-3)$ version maintains. $\endgroup$ – Dave L. Renfro Nov 3 '14 at 17:02
10
$\begingroup$

This is the distributive property for multiplication: $(a+b)(c+d)=a(c+d)+b(c+d)$. In your case:

$$k(a+b)(c+d)=(ka+kb)(c+d)=ka(c+d)+kb(c+d).$$

This comes from:

$$k(a+b) = \overbrace{(a+b)+(a+b)+\dotsc+(a+b)}^{k\text{-times}} = a+b+a+b+\dotsc+a+b=\overbrace{a+a+\dotsc+a}^{k\text{-times}}+\overbrace{b+b+\dotsc+b}^{k\text{-times}}=ka+kb.$$

Generalizing a bit more:

$$(k+p)(a+b) = \overbrace{(a+b)+(a+b)+\dotsc+(a+b)}^{(k+p)\text{-times}} = a+b+a+b+\dotsc+a+b=\overbrace{a+a+\dotsc+a}^{(k+p)\text{-times}}+\overbrace{b+b+\dotsc+b}^{(k+p)\text{-times}}=(k+p)a+(k+p)b.$$

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This is exactly the answer to my question. Many thanks. $\endgroup$ – Bright Nov 3 '14 at 16:57
  • $\begingroup$ You're welcome. $\endgroup$ – Vladimir Vargas Nov 3 '14 at 16:59
  • $\begingroup$ The explanation doesn't work when $k$ and $p$ are not natural numbers. The better explanation would be using rectangle areas, like this picture shows (except, of course, you can use real numbers for the areas instead). $\endgroup$ – user26486 Nov 3 '14 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ Do you have a counter example? $\endgroup$ – Vladimir Vargas Nov 3 '14 at 18:43
  • $\begingroup$ Use @mathh when replying so that I get a notification. And you can't add something $\pi$ times. But you can find the area of a rectangle with a side $\pi$. $\endgroup$ – user26486 Nov 9 '14 at 16:56
1
$\begingroup$

Here's my attempt to explain it in a very super simple way based on what you already know. Make sure you make yourself familiar with Vladimir's answer as well.

Consider...

$2*3*4=24$, or in other words, $6*4=24$ most of people understand it very well that the both are the same.

Now consider $3+3*4=15$ you know can't replace $2*3$, with $3+3$ in that equation. It breaks the equation if you do that.

Consider now $(3+3)*4=24$, hey this works.

Conclusion, the simplified multiplication of form $a+a+...+a$ within an equation has to be written within parenthesis. In order to preserve the consistency within the equation.

Answering why the parenthesis

How would you explain the principle why $x(x+2)(x−3)$ is not $x^2+2x(x-3)$ but $(x^2+2x)(x-3)$? (it's about the lack of parenthesis)

$x(x+2)(x−3)=\overbrace{((x+2)+(x+2)+...+(x+2))}^{x\text{-times (notice parenthesis)}}(x−3)$

or the same can be noted, as Vladimir explained $k(a+b)(c+d)=(ka+kb)(c+d)$:

$(x^2+2x)(x-3)$

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.