yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Factoring polynomials using complex numbers | Khan Academy


2m read
·Nov 10, 2024

We're told that Ahmat tried to write ( x^4 + 5x^2 + 4 ) as a product of linear factors. This is his work, and then they tell us all the steps that he did, and then they say in what step did Ahmad make his first mistake. So pause this video and see if you can figure that out.

All right, now let's work through this together. So we're starting with ( x^4 + 10x^2 + 9 ), and it looks like Ahmad tried to factor that into ( (x^2 + 9)(x^2 + 1) ). And this indeed does make sense because if we said that let's say ( u ) is equal to ( x^2 ), we could rewrite this right over here as ( u^2 + 10u + 9 ). The whole reason why you would do this is so that you could write this higher order expression in terms of a second degree expression.

Then we've learned how to factor things like this many times. We look, and we say, "Okay, what two numbers when I add them I get 10, and when I multiply them I get 9?" It would be 9 and 1. So you could write this as ( (u + 9)(u + 1) ). And of course, if ( u ) is equal to ( x^2 ), this would be ( (x^2 + 9)(x^2 + 1) ), which is exactly what Ahmad has right over here. So step 1 is looking great.

All right, now let's think about what Ahmad did in step two. They didn't do anything to ( x^2 + 9 ), but it looks like they tried to further factor ( x^2 + 1 ). And this does seem right; we just have to remind ourselves, just as you have a difference of squares if you're dealing with non-complex numbers. So we could rewrite this right over here as ( (x + a)(x - a) ).

We could have a sum of squares if we're thinking about complex numbers; this is going to be ( (x + ai)(x - ai) ). And in this situation, well, the ( x ) is ( x ), and then our ( a ) would be 1. So we're going to have ( (x + i)(x - i) ). So step 2 is looking great, and now let's go to step three.

So in step three, there’s no change to this part of the expression, and it looks like Ahmad is trying to factor ( x^2 + 9 ) based on the same principle. Now, ( x^2 + 9 ) is the same thing as ( x^2 + 3^2 ). So if you use this exact same idea here, if you factor it, it should be ( (x + 3i)(x - 3i) ).

But what we see over here is Ahmad took the square root of three instead of just having a three here. Ahmad treated it instead of having a nine here as if we actually had a three. So they made a little bit of an error there. So this is the step where Ahmad makes his first mistake, and we're done.

More Articles

View All
How to Buy Happiness With Money
[Laughter] What would you do if you won the lottery? Personally, I’d pay off my debt, quit my job, and move to Japan. It’s a fun scenario to think about, even if it’s never going to happen. Statistically, you’re more likely to give birth to quadruplets or…
Why Investors Can’t Fix Your Company – Dalton Caldwell and Michael Seibel
Hey, Dalton, you’re a pre-product market fit. Do you have five-year financial projections? That’s a great example of that. Financial projections may be a good idea later stage, but to even ask me if I had financial projections, I was like, what’s a financ…
NEW FED STIMULUS WARNING | FREE MONEY + INFINITE SPENDING
What’s up, you guys? It’s Graham here. So today, I’m going to be pulling a Meet Kevin and posting a brand new video within hours of a market update. And today, that update comes from none other than Jerome Powell, who is the chairman of the Federal Reserv…
shower thoughts that could end quarantine..
Extinction level events have killed up to 99% of all living things that have ever existed. Embrace the 1%. Being in lockdown has given us time. It’s given us time to think, to ask questions, and to consider things that we might not have given a second tho…
EXCLUSIVE: "Glowing" Sea Turtle Discovered | National Geographic
Wait, what did you find? We found a biofluorescent turtle! The scientists have only really tuned in to biofluorescence in the last 10 years, and as soon as we started tuning into it, we started to find it everywhere. First, it was in corals and jellyfish…
The Most Efficient Way to Destroy the Universe – False Vacuum
What if our universe comes with a self-destruct button to eliminate itself so cleanly and efficiently, that every single physical thing would just stop existing and life would be impossible forever? The ultimate ecological catastrophe - vacuum decay. (The…