context
stringlengths
545
71.9k
questionsrc
stringlengths
16
10.2k
question
stringlengths
11
563
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
is there an easier way to find that number that if given the certain exponent ( 5 ) makes it into the 32 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so you 're starting to see something interesting . 4 to the 1/2 is equal to 2 , 2 squared is equal to 4 . so let 's get a couple more examples of this , just so you make sure you get what 's going on .
would it be correct to say that 4^1/2 * 4^1/2 = 4 because you add the halves , which become 1 , as another way of showing 4^1/2 is equal to the square root of 4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 .
so to be clear , when given a rational exponent the rules change to say , no longer is the number being raised a `` factor '' to be multiplied by itself by the number of times its raised by but is now the `` product '' you 're looking to arrive at by the number of times given by the denominator ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
how can you solve a fraction witha fraction as its exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
does that mean that that the number next to the square root is the amount of times in which you are suppose to find the cubed square root of ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
how do you type the radical sign in the computer ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
what if the base is negative ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
so how is 32 the same thing as 2.2.2.2. ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
how would you solve a fraction with a fractional exponent , like 94/17^2/5 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
do a few more examples of that . what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 .
what do you do if you take 25 and raise it to a power where the numerator is n't one like 25 to the 3/2 power ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , we already know that 8 is equal to 2 to the third power . so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 .
so following the logic of 8^1/3 = 2 does that make 8^2/3 = 4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
what does principal root mean ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
so does that mean that by saying ( for example ) 4 to the power of 1/2 you are just asking the square root of four ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
how to type 6th root ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
what if the exponent is a fraction that is like , 3^3/2 or 4^3/2 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 .
when you are square rooting a positive number , should it be positive/negative that number ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
is a fifth root possible ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
if a jet can travel 600 mph , how long in seconds will it take the jet to travel 5 miles ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we already know 4 to the third is 64 , so this is going to be 1/64 . now let 's think about fractional exponents . so we 're going to think about what is 4 to the 1/2 power .
is there any general way to calculate the value of an expression having a fractional exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so you 're starting to see something interesting . 4 to the 1/2 is equal to 2 , 2 squared is equal to 4 . so let 's get a couple more examples of this , just so you make sure you get what 's going on .
like here sal finds ( 32 ) ^ ( 1/5 ) as 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 but what about a number where this is not as clear such as ( 4 ) ^ ( 1/4 ) or ( 3 ) ^ ( 1/3 ) ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
what do you do if you have an exponent like 2/3 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
i know what a root is but what is a cube root ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared . now , let 's think about what happens when you take something to the 1/3 power . so let 's imagine taking 8 to the 1/3 power .
what happens when the fractional exponent is n't as clearly defined as something like1/2 or 1/3 as the exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
what if the exponent is 2/3 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
-1/-5 x 5 + ( 7-9 ) + 11 to the 2nd power ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so you 're starting to see something interesting . 4 to the 1/2 is equal to 2 , 2 squared is equal to 4 . so let 's get a couple more examples of this , just so you make sure you get what 's going on .
why is it that 4 to the power of 1/2 is the square root of 4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
let 's do one more like this . what is 25 to the 1/2 going to be ? well , this is just going to be 5 .
should i cancel out the 10s , m 's , and exponents to end up with 1^6 / 25 yr-1 , or do i move the tens to the end and end up with ( 1 / 25 yr-1 ) x 10^6 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
how about the exponent being a negative fraction ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 . do a few more examples of that .
but what about if the 1/2 power is used on an irregular square root number ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
does the mean you would find the cube root of it ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
is there such a thing as a fourth root ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
why is algebra called algebra ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
do a few more examples of that . what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 . so this is going to be 4 .
why is 4 to the 1/3 power = the cube root of 4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
do a few more examples of that . what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 .
does 'm ' to the 'a ' power with an index of 'b ' = 'm ' to the 'a'/'b ' power ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents .
is there any way to calculate roots ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 .
is there a way to find out the roots of a number ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
is sal saying that by definition the fractional exponent of a number is the principal root only ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
do we always ignore the negative root ( assuming one exists ) when we use this notation ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 . so this is going to be 4 .
why is it that 4 to the power of one half is the same as the square root of 4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
how do you calculate the decimal ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
what do you do when you have a variable inside a radical with a fraction as an exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
the principal root of 9 , that 's just going to be equal to 3 . and likewise , we could 've also said that 3 squared is , or let me write it this way , that 9 is equal to 3 squared . these are both true statements .
how do i write a radical in simplest form ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
32 ^2/5 what is the value of the expression below ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
so basically a principle root is just negative and a postive of a root number ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
the principal root of 9 , that 's just going to be equal to 3 . and likewise , we could 've also said that 3 squared is , or let me write it this way , that 9 is equal to 3 squared . these are both true statements .
how do you write an expression in radical form ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
how do you find a number^2/3 for eg ; how do you find ( 29.5 ) ^2/3 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so you 're starting to see something interesting . 4 to the 1/2 is equal to 2 , 2 squared is equal to 4 . so let 's get a couple more examples of this , just so you make sure you get what 's going on .
so would 4^1/2 be equal to only +2 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
why is ^1/2 = ^2 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
but what do you do when the integer ( not the exponent ) is a fraction ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 .
how would you find the fractional root of a number irrational number such as : 40^1/5 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
how do you conceptually understand the difference between rational and negative exponents ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
is there such thing as a rational exponent with variable ( s ) , like 5^ ( 5r ) ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so this says hey , give me the number that if i were to multiply that number , or i were to repeatedly multiply that number five times , what is that , i would get 32 . well , 32 is the same thing as 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 . so 2 is that number , that if i were to multiply it five times , then i 'm going to ...
i get that +2 is supposed to be `` the principle root '' , but what about -2 , how does that work if the exponent is a improper negative fraction ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so the cube root of 8 , or 8 to the 1/3 , is just going to be equal to 2 . this says hey , give me the number that if i say that number , times that number , times that number , i 'm going to get 8 . well , that number is 2 because 2 to the third power is 8 .
how do i exponent the number ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 . so this is going to be 4 .
4^-3 is also -4 x -4 x -4 , right ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 . so this is going to be 4 .
is 1/4 the same as -4 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
do a few more examples of that . what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 .
sal explains 4 to the 1/3 power , then he explains 4 to the 1/2 , 4 to the 1/3 power is 64 & 4 to the 1/2 power is 2 , so the numerator do n't matter is it is 4 to the 1/3 power ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
what is a cubed root ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we already know 4 to the third is 64 , so this is going to be 1/64 . now let 's think about fractional exponents . so we 're going to think about what is 4 to the 1/2 power .
what if the fractional exponent is a negative ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that if i were to multiply it by itself , or if i were to have two of those numbers and i were to multiply them , times each other , that same number , i 'm going to get 4 ? well , what times itself is eq...
how do i add or subtract numbers that are powered to fractions ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them .
does anyone know how to type an exponent on a macbook air ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
is there such thing as a negative factional exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared . now , let 's think about what happens when you take something to the 1/3 power .
could you have multiplied the base by the exponent ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
is the principle root always positive for the square root only or all roots ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
is there a major difference when it is negative ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
now , let 's think about what happens when you take something to the 1/3 power . so let 's imagine taking 8 to the 1/3 power . so the definition here is that taking something to the 1/3 power is the same thing as taking the cube root of that number . and the cube root is just saying , well what number , if i had three ...
does that mean if you have the exponent 1/3 you are taking the cube root and so on ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
do a few more examples of that . what is 64 to the 1/3 power ? well , we already know that 4 times 4 times 4 is 64 . so this is going to be 4 .
is 4^-3 = 1/4^3 = 1/64 the same idea as : 1/4/4/4 , or 1 divided by 4 divided by 4 divided by 4 = 1/64 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
so you 're starting to see something interesting . 4 to the 1/2 is equal to 2 , 2 squared is equal to 4 . so let 's get a couple more examples of this , just so you make sure you get what 's going on .
what would 4^-1/2 power be ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
why is all the exponents non-negative or greater than zero ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
well , this is just going to be 5 . 5 times 5 is 25 . or you could say , 25 is equal to 5 squared .
how would you solve ( x-5 ) ^2/3 =16 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
now let 's think about fractional exponents . so we 're going to think about what is 4 to the 1/2 power . and i encourage you to pause the video and at least take a guess about what you think this is .
what do i search to find ( 1/4 ) to the x power ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
what is a cube root ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third . and we already know 4 to the third is 64 , so this is going to be 1/64 .
do you simply approximate/take the limit ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
but either way , this is going to result in 4 times 4 is 16 , times 4 is 64 . we also know a little bit about negative exponents . so for example , if i were take 4 to the negative 3 power , we know this negative tells us to take the reciprocal 1/4 to the third .
would the principle root of a negative have a positive or a negative one ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
these are both true statements . let 's do one more like this . what is 25 to the 1/2 going to be ?
what would happen if you made a fractional exponent with a numerator other than one , like 9^2/3 ?
we already know a good bit about exponents . for example , we know if we took the number 4 and raised it to the third power , this is equivalent to taking three fours and multiplying them . or you can also view it as starting with a 1 , and then multiplying the 1 by 4 , or multiplying that by 4 , three times . but eith...
and we 'll talk in the future about why this is , and the reason why this is defined this way , is it has all sorts of neat and elegant properties when you start manipulating the actual exponents . but what is the square root of 4 , especially the principal root , mean ? well that means , well , what is a number that i...
how do i find the root of a number , without a calculator , if i do n't actually know what the root is ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
the n-th derivative evaluated at 0 . and that 's why it makes applying the maclaurin series formula fairly straightforward . if i wanted to approximate e to the x using a maclaurin series -- so e to the x -- and i 'll put a little approximately over here .
how would you make the maclaurin series for number pi ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
the n-th derivative evaluated at 0 . and that 's why it makes applying the maclaurin series formula fairly straightforward . if i wanted to approximate e to the x using a maclaurin series -- so e to the x -- and i 'll put a little approximately over here . and we 'll get closer and closer to the real e to the x as we k...
what is the maclaurin series for tan ( x ) ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
that if you wanted to approximate e , you just evaluate this at x is equal to 1 . so if you wanted to approximate e , you 'd say e is approximate to -- well , e is e to the first power . and that 's going to be approximately equal to this polynomial evaluated at 1 .
how would you incorporate imaginary numbers to reconcile e , cos , and sin like sal alluded to ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
it 's going to be equal to any of the derivatives evaluated at 0 . the n-th derivative evaluated at 0 . and that 's why it makes applying the maclaurin series formula fairly straightforward .
from n=0 to infinity converges ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
it 's going to be equal to any of the derivatives evaluated at 0 . the n-th derivative evaluated at 0 . and that 's why it makes applying the maclaurin series formula fairly straightforward .
why does n't sal talk about the tan taylor series at 0 ( maclaurin ) ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
and something pretty neat is starting to emerge . is that e to x , 1 -- this is just really cool -- that e to the x can be approximated by 1 plus x plus x squared over 2 factorial plus x to the third over 3 factorial . once again , e to the x is starting to look like a pretty cool thing .
how would the maclaurin series for [ ( 1+e to the x ) squared ] be found ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
so plus x plus , this is also 1 , so it 's going to be x squared over 2 factorial . so plus x squared over 2 factorial . all of these things are going to be 1 .
why does the approximation not alternate between + and - ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
and something pretty neat is starting to emerge . is that e to x , 1 -- this is just really cool -- that e to the x can be approximated by 1 plus x plus x squared over 2 factorial plus x to the third over 3 factorial . once again , e to the x is starting to look like a pretty cool thing .
can you construct the maclaurin series for f ( x ) = e ^ ( -1/x^2 ) ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , frankly , one of the amazing things about the n...
how would you find the maclaurin expansion of f ( x ) =e^3x ?
now let 's do something pretty interesting . and this will , to some degree , be one of the easiest functions to find the maclaurin series representation of . but let 's try to approximate e to the x. f of x is equal to e to the x . and what makes this really simple is , when you take the derivative -- and this is , fr...
that if you wanted to approximate e , you just evaluate this at x is equal to 1 . so if you wanted to approximate e , you 'd say e is approximate to -- well , e is e to the first power . and that 's going to be approximately equal to this polynomial evaluated at 1 .
what is the expansion of e ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
consider the following challenge . alice and bob can transmit and receive messages binary . ( morse code ) they charge their customers 1 penny per bit to use their system , and a regular customer arrives who wants to send a message , and their messages are 1,000 symbols long .
is audio data pseudo-random from a binary point of view ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
( morse code ) while , if the entropy increases due to unpredictability , our ability to compress decreases . ( morse code ) if we want to compress beyond entropy , we must necessarily throw away information in our messages .
is audio compression done by throwing away non-audible frequencies from a fast fourier transform ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
for example , if you shorten the code for d to just 0 , then a message 011 could perhaps mean daa , or maybe just b . so for this to work , you would need to introduce letter spaces , which cancel out any savings during transmission . now , how far does this compress the message compared to the original 2,000 bits ?
how much are letter spaces accounted for in compression codes ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge .
does radio send information using binary digits ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code .
or do the waves cause the receiver to vibrate at a frequency conducive for analog decompression into audio waves ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
that means with this huffman coding we can expect to compress the messages from 2,000 bits to 1,750 bits . and claude shannon was the first to claim that the limit of compression will always be the entropy of the message source . as the entropy , or uncertainty , of our source decreases due to known statistical structu...
what does `` entropy '' mean ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
david huffman famously provided the optimal strategy , which he published in 1952 , and based on building a binary tree from the bottom up . to begin , we can list all symbols at the bottom which we can call nodes . then we find the two least probable nodes , in this case b and c , and merge them into one , and add the...
how do you group the nodes when their probabilities do n't imply obvious divisions ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
normally , this is sent with a standard 2-bit code , which results in charging for 2,000 bits . however , alice and bob already did some analysis on this customer before , and determined that the probability of each symbol in the message is different . can they use these known probabilities to compress the transmission...
nevertheless are n't separators really useful for quickly accessing a certain symbol ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
normally , this is sent with a standard 2-bit code , which results in charging for 2,000 bits . however , alice and bob already did some analysis on this customer before , and determined that the probability of each symbol in the message is different . can they use these known probabilities to compress the transmission...
so are the compression algorithms different for different languages ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
however , alice and bob already did some analysis on this customer before , and determined that the probability of each symbol in the message is different . can they use these known probabilities to compress the transmission and increase their profits ? what 's the optimal coding strategy ?
is there a standard for how to assign probabilities for each language ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code .
what is the prefix used to say `` this is a new character '' ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
that means with this huffman coding we can expect to compress the messages from 2,000 bits to 1,750 bits . and claude shannon was the first to claim that the limit of compression will always be the entropy of the message source . as the entropy , or uncertainty , of our source decreases due to known statistical structu...
what does it mean by the statement that limit of compression will always be the entropy of the message source ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
so we multiply the length of each code times the probability of occurrence , and add them together , which results in an average length of 1.75 bits per symbol on average . that means with this huffman coding we can expect to compress the messages from 2,000 bits to 1,750 bits . and claude shannon was the first to clai...
it looks like the symbols are only as , bs , cs , and ds ... so two bits for each ( 00 , 01 , 11 , 10 ) ?
: when we represent information , such as an image , such as an image , digitally , it means we must slice it up into tiny chunks . this allows us to send an image as a sequence of color symbols , and these colors can be represented as unique numbers , using some code . consider the following challenge . alice and bob...
consider the following challenge . alice and bob can transmit and receive messages binary . ( morse code ) they charge their customers 1 penny per bit to use their system , and a regular customer arrives who wants to send a message , and their messages are 1,000 symbols long .
it says that alice and bob would get more profit by compressing their code , but sending less bits means getting less pennies right ?