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

Dividing polynomials by x (no remainders) | Algebra 2 | Khan Academy


3m read
·Nov 10, 2024

What I'd like to do in this video is try to figure out what ( x ) to the fourth minus ( 2x ) to the third plus ( 5x ) divided by ( x ) is equal to. So pause this video and see if you can have a go at that before we work through this together.

All right, so if we're saying what is this top expression divided by this bottom expression, another way to think about it is what do I have to multiply? So I'm going to multiply something; I'll put that in parentheses. If I multiply that something times ( x ), I should get ( x ) to the fourth minus ( 2x ) to the third plus ( 5x ).

Now, how do I approach that? Well, there are two ways that I could tackle it. One way is I could just rewrite this expression as being, and I will just make this ( x ) in yellow so I can keep track of it. I could just rewrite this as ( 1 ) over ( x ) times ( x ) to the ( 4th ) minus ( 2x ) to the third plus ( 5x ), and then I can distribute the ( 1 ) over ( x ).

So what is that going to be equal to? What’s it going to be equal to ( x ) to the fourth over ( x ) minus ( 2x ) to the third over ( x ) plus ( 5x ) over ( x )? So what are each of these going to be equal to? ( x ) to the ( 4th ) divided by ( x ): if I have 4 ( x's ) that I'm multiplying together and then I divide by ( x ), that’s going to be equivalent to ( x ) to the third power. So this right over here is equal to ( x ) to the third.

You could also get there from your exponent properties; in the denominator, you have an ( x ) to the first power, and so you would subtract the exponents. You have the same base here, so that’s ( x ) to the third. And then this part right over here, what would that equal to? Well, it's going to be minus ( 2x ) to the third divided by ( x ) to the first. Well, by the same property, that's going to be ( x^2 ).

And then, last but not least, if you take five ( x's ) and then you divide by ( x ), you are just going to be left with five. You can verify that this indeed, if I were to multiply it by ( x ), I'm going to get ( x ) to the fourth minus ( 2x ) to the third plus ( 5x ).

Let me do that; if I put ( x ) to the third minus ( 2x^2 ) plus ( 5 ) times ( x ), what I can do is distribute the ( x ). ( x ) times ( x ) to the third is ( x^4 ), ( x ) times negative ( 2x^2 ) is negative ( 2x^3 ), ( x ) times ( 5 ) is ( 5x ).

Now, I mentioned there are two ways that I could do it. Another way that I could try to tackle it is I could look at this numerator and try to factor an ( x ) out. I would try to factor out whatever I see in the denominator. So if I do that, actually, let me just rewrite the numerator.

So I can rewrite ( x ) to the fourth as ( x ) times ( x^3 ), and then I can rewrite the minus ( 2x ) to the third as, let me write it this way, as plus ( x ) times negative ( 2x^2 ), and then I could write this ( 5x ) as being equal to plus ( x ) times ( 5 ).

Then I’m going to divide everything by ( x ). I just rewrote the numerator here, but for each of those terms, I factored out an ( x ). Now I can factor out ( x ) out of the whole thing. So I sometimes think of factoring out an ( x ) out of the whole thing as reverse distributive property.

So if I factor out this ( x ) out of every term, what am I left with? I'm left with ( x ) times ( x^3 - 2x^2 + 5 ). I ended up doing that in the wrong color, but hopefully, you're following—plus ( 5 ), and then all of that is divided by ( x ).

As long as ( x ) does not equal zero, ( x ) divided by ( x ) is going to be equal to one. And we're left with what we had to begin with, or the answer that we had to begin with.

So these are two different approaches. Nothing super sophisticated here. When you're dividing by ( x ), you're just like, "Hey, that's the same thing as multiplying every term by ( 1 ) over ( x )" or you can factor out an ( x ) out of the numerator, and then they cancel out.

More Articles

View All
The Aztecs: From Empire to A.I. | Podcast | Overheard at National Geographic
So we’re in a village in rural Mexico, about a day’s drive from Mexico City. You can hear music emanating from a little house that has a thatched roof, but inside, that’s where the action is. There’s a ceremony going on. The rituals often take place in li…
God is not a man with a beard on a throne in the clouds | Pete Holmes | Big Think
It’s funny, it’s almost a Hollywood cliché that people like me get turned onto Joseph Campbell when they go to Hollywood. But for me, it wasn’t to write a better screenplay. Because he taught us about the hero’s journey. I’m sure you’ve all heard about th…
Mysteries of vernacular: Dynamite - Jessica Oreck and Rachael Teel
Transcriber: Bedirhan Cinar Reviewer: Jessica Ruby Mysteries of vernacular: Dynamite, an explosive consisting of nitroglycerin, typically molded into sticks. Dynamite, which coincidentally is closely related to the word dynasty, has as much to do with fa…
Heavens on Earth with skeptical Dr. Michael Shermer
[Music] Okay, so I’m talking today with Dr. Michael Shermer, and Dr. Shermer is, among other things, the publisher of Skeptic magazine. But more importantly for our purposes today, he is also the author of this book, new book, “Heaven on Earth,” and we’re…
Why Science Says It's Good for Kids to Lie | National Geographic
[Music] My name is Ellen. I’m a research assistant at Kong Leaf Development Lab. This is where we do our deception studies, and here we play three games with the kids. You’ve been doing such a good job, and we got off to such a good start that I kind of w…
Should we be worried about AI turning into a "Machine God"?
Scenario 4 is AGI: artificial general intelligence. This is the idea that a machine will be smarter than a human at almost all tasks, and this is the explicit goal of OpenAI. They want to build AGI, and there’s a lot of debate about what this means. When …