Log questions from Jones and Couchman! (1 Viewer)

[LoveHateSchool]

I scanned the page.

I need help with Question 7, I'm just totally blank on that.
And Question 8, I could show the fraction part easily, but not the hence and otherwise prove that the integral was what was said. Could not get 1/2log1.5 I was meant to be showing.

REP and eternal gratitude for help
I scanned the page.

I need help with Question 7, I'm just totally blank on that.
And Question 8, I could show the fraction part easily, but not the hence and otherwise prove that the integral was what was said. Could not get 1/2log1.5 I was meant to be showing.

REP and eternal gratitude for help

 

[nightweaver066]

Wow thanks for scanning it! It's so clear too haha.

I'll just give you some hints/tips.

7. Notice how the degree of the numerator is the same as the degree of the denominator.

This means you can reduce it.

E.g. for this,







Apply a similar process to that question, then you can integrate both terms.

 

[nightweaver066]

For question 8, you showed that two terms are equivalent to another. Notice how the RHS of that expression is very similar to the actual integral?

You could divide both sides by two then integrate that expression.

So,

 

[CcYann]

I scanned the page.

I need help with Question 7, I'm just totally blank on that.
And Question 8, I could show the fraction part easily, but not the hence and otherwise prove that the integral was what was said. Could not get 1/2log1.5 I was meant to be showing.

REP and eternal gratitude for help
I scanned the page.

I need help with Question 7, I'm just totally blank on that.
And Question 8, I could show the fraction part easily, but not the hence and otherwise prove that the integral was what was said. Could not get 1/2log1.5 I was meant to be showing.

REP and eternal gratitude for help

here the answer I did. hope it helps

 

[nightweaver066]

here the answer I did. hope it helps
View attachment 25087

2U students don't do polynomial division!

 

[LoveHateSchool]

^Thank you so much both of you.

Nightweaver, I got the Q7 out by following the pattern of your example one. I'll have to look for more Qs to practice of that type, it's not really something I've done much of.

 

[jmadden]

my school uses J&C too.
and i dont know any other school that does.
it was published 30 years ago.
i think the way in which they have explained the content is outdated, though the questions are great.
what do you think and how do you like the text?

 

[D94]

For Q7, you don't require polynomial long division, but you should still be able to recognize that the numerator has factors of the denominator:

 

[iSplicer]

For Q7, you don't require polynomial long division, but you should still be able to recognize that the numerator has factors of the denominator:

Nice solution, but I think what you've basically done is long-division on-the-go =P

 

[D94]

Nice solution, but I think what you've basically done is long-division on-the-go =P

That's true, but since 2U don't learn polynomial long division (ie. the fully set out method), an intuitive method it to recognize the factor of the denominator in the numerator then split up the polynomial. Sure, it's essentially long division, but since it's such an easy question, you could do it in your head, ie. you could got from line 1 to line 3 or 4, then the answer. But yes, I agree with you.

 

[LoveHateSchool]

To jmadden,
I don't like the textbook, it's not user friendly, esp. cause we used a mixed 3 unit edition so obviously have to disregard some stuff. Questions are fine if you find the type you are looking for.

 

[iSplicer]

That's true, but since 2U don't learn polynomial long division (ie. the fully set out method), an intuitive method it to recognize the factor of the denominator in the numerator then split up the polynomial. Sure, it's essentially long division, but since it's such an easy question, you could do it in your head, ie. you could got from line 1 to line 3 or 4, then the answer. But yes, I agree with you.

Very valid points. My apologies, I didn't recognise that the question may have been presented in a 2u context.

 

[iSplicer]

To jmadden,
I don't like the textbook, it's not user friendly, esp. cause we used a mixed 3 unit edition so obviously have to disregard some stuff. Questions are fine if you find the type you are looking for.

And yeah, absolutely agreed. I never used Couchman, always stuck to pender's Cambridge. Quality book.