i used your videos religiously when i took a level further maths, now i am in my third year of my degree and i am back to dusting off these techniques for my final exam before i graduate! thanks for the help for so many years!
Um, regarding your 'calculation method' of squaring both sides you use here... would it still technically work for values like l -x + 1 l where the x is negative? Also, say you have the scenario where l x + 2 l > 5 l x - 3 l would you still be able to apply the squaring method to this by (x + 2)^2 > 5(x - 3)^2 or is this impossible? Sorry for asking so many questions, and thanks! :)
The same technique should work, I think. Because the mod function will always return a positive answer, so the squaring method should work. Sorry you didn't get your answer😅✌
if you apply an increasing function ( f (x)=x2》》x>0 ) to both side of an inequality, you keep the original order. On the other hand if you apply a decreasing function( f(x)=x2 》》x y is true if and only if the inequality x2>y2 is true. On the other hand if you know that x and y both ≤0, then the inequality x>y is true if and only if the inequality x2
Because at first we don't know what is the actual value of x. Putting - in both sides does not guarantee both values will be positive, for example if x=6, then putting negative on both sides will give us a negative value. If we square both sides, we can be sure the value will always be positive
Too complicated for no reason. Could have been done in 2 steps. No hate to the creator but it could save some time of those students who have a test tmrw. 2x-3>x+3 OR 2x-36 OR x
![CHILE vs. BRASIL [1-2] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5ObJt_71AYc/mqdefault.jpg)
i used your videos religiously when i took a level further maths, now i am in my third year of my degree and i am back to dusting off these techniques for my final exam before i graduate! thanks for the help for so many years!
your videos have saved my mathematical life
cool
😃
There’s one aspect of these that had been driving me nuts for a while now and you’ve just explained it clearly for me here. Thanks 🤝
I want to say thanks for the help provided in this and the previous video. They have both been very helpful towards revision purposes. Thank you again
Your videos have helped me tremendously. Thank you for all you do!! :)
Thanks the way you explain is just show how good your concept is ❤
Thank u !! I searched for this cuz i couldn't understand this in my cls ..but now it's clear
Please make more calculus videos. Or anything related to pre-calc/calc.
Thank you so much!! You don't know how much this helped! It cleared up a lot of my questions and problems :) So again, thank you for the tutorial!
Um, regarding your 'calculation method' of squaring both sides you use here...
would it still technically work for values like l -x + 1 l where the x is negative?
Also, say you have the scenario where l x + 2 l > 5 l x - 3 l would you still be able to apply the squaring method to this by (x + 2)^2 > 5(x - 3)^2 or is this impossible?
Sorry for asking so many questions, and thanks! :)
Rip dude who never got answered
@@jordabox lel
The same technique should work, I think. Because the mod function will always return a positive answer, so the squaring method should work. Sorry you didn't get your answer😅✌
yes, it will always work, because |a| is defined to be sqrt(a^2)
Beyond reasonable doughnuts it will work out, because squaring both sides doesn't alter anything in the equation
Thanks, Sir. This is precisely helpful for my IGCSE maths.
Wow wonderful tutorial
your teaching covers all angles,Thanx
your videos are very helpful
Thank you
YOU SIMPLY ROCK!!!!
Do these examples apply when it is greater than or equal to mod function ie clinical term slack inequalities?
To do the calculation method do the two coefficients of the x's have to be positive or the numbers?
wondering the same thing
if you apply an increasing function ( f (x)=x2》》x>0 ) to both side of an inequality, you keep the original order. On the other hand if you apply a decreasing function( f(x)=x2 》》x y is true if and only if the inequality x2>y2 is true.
On the other hand if you know that x and y both ≤0, then the inequality x>y is true if and only if the inequality x2
Thank you sir
Thanks!!
At 10:31, what if you moved the 4x^2-12x+9 to the right? Would the signs change? Cuz if not it would be -3x^2-6x
when you talk about when to use calculation method,what do you mean by positive quantities
...............
thankyou so much
would the sketching method also work for | x +2 | = 4 for example, and just drawing in the line x=4?
Yes Jordan. The sketching method would work and is generally one of the more reliable ways to solve mod equations.
Could you please mention the tools (i.e whiteboard and the marker) you used to make this video
this video is better than TL maths
Glad it helped you
gr8 video helped alot :)
The problem could be worked without squaring both sides. If I2x-3I>Ix+3I, then 2x-x>3+3, giving x>6. Or because it is a modulus, then also 2x-3
Amazing
Hello Sir, which software do you use to demonstrate your workings?
have any vids on modulus inequalities for trig functions???
Insane
How can we write this in form of brackets....?
x belongs to (1,6)?
Hello Sir, what if there is
Why didn't we use (-) in both sides for finding the solutions of x? Both are modulus no?
Because at first we don't know what is the actual value of x. Putting - in both sides does not guarantee both values will be positive, for example if x=6, then putting negative on both sides will give us a negative value. If we square both sides, we can be sure the value will always be positive
At 6:44 why was it an 'or' situation and i still dont get how x is greater than 6
what would you do for Ix-2I>3I2x+1I because I get negative values which is not possible of absolute value
You need to apply the same method. Sketch each graph and determine values for x for which Ix-2I is greater than 3I2x+1I
What do you mean by we can only square them when the quantity are positive?? There’s clearly a -3 🤔
The mod of a curve can't be negative so the curve reflects to the positive 3 instead
Too complicated for no reason. Could have been done in 2 steps. No hate to the creator but it could save some time of those students who have a test tmrw.
2x-3>x+3 OR 2x-36 OR x
no, sorry.