Maths question! (binomial expansions)

[Bugz]

This question has me a little confused as I'm not how to how to work with the powers. Answers & methods appreciated:


10. In the binomial expansion of (2k + x) to the power of n, where k is a constant and n is a positive integer, the coefficient of x(squared) is equal to the coefficient of x(cubed).

a. Prove that n = 6k + 2


The binomial expansion for the question is hard to write out on here i'm afraid.

I'm figuring solving the expansion for x(squared) and x(cubed) then putting them equal to each other, working out the answer, then factoring it to give a positive and negative integer, of which only one can be the answer but i'm not sure how that would work if we have a 6k in the 'power' section.

Anyone that can work it out / give it a go may receive rep loving! :d

edit - the binomial theorm is here if anyone needs: clicky

 

[pikeh]

..........7

 

[Tinu]

This question has me a little confused as I'm not how to how to work with the powers. Answers & methods appreciated:


10. In the binomial expansion of (2k + x) to the power of n, where k is a constant and n is a positive integer, the coefficient of x(squared) is equal to the coefficient of x(cubed).

a. Prove that n = 6k + 2


The binomial expansion for the question is hard to write out on here i'm afraid.

I'm figuring solving the expansion for x(squared) and x(cubed) then putting them equal to each other, working out the answer, then factoring it to give a positive and negative integer, of which only one can be the answer but i'm not sure how that would work if we have a 6k in the 'power' section.

Anyone that can work it out / give it a go may receive rep loving! :d

edit - the binomial theorm is here if anyone needs: clicky

god you suck

 

[tris-]

did this last year. fucked if im gonna try again or something similar at least.

 

[Lamp]

You can easily prove this by taking a Deekins curve on a manular leptokurtic cross-manifold, and with double integration - dxdy - use stochastic Ito with log-normal jump analysis, before - as always - normalising the errors with generalised auto-regressive conditional heteroskedasticity.

 

[BeerHunter]

You can easily prove this by taking a Deekins curve on a manular leptokurtic cross-manifold, and with double integration - dxdy - use stochastic Ito with log-normal jump analysis, before - as always - normalising the errors with generalised auto-regressive conditional heteroskedasticity.

LOL

 

[kivik]

Do it on a paper and scan it and post picture. I don't get this english-maths-language.

 

[tris-]

You can easily prove this by taking a Deekins curve on a manular leptokurtic cross-manifold, and with double integration - dxdy - use stochastic Ito with log-normal jump analysis, before - as always - normalising the errors with generalised auto-regressive conditional heteroskedasticity.

ah integration, thats what i was thinking of.

 

[Gamah]

is the answer "cunter"?

 

[Bugz]

Where are all the masters of maths?

 

[Nate]

Never fear, I am here. But I've had too many a beer.

 

[Gamah]

So the answer isn't Cunter?

Then sorry Bugz, I'm well and truly stumped!

 

[Bugz]

So the answer isn't Cunter?

Then sorry Bugz, I'm well and truly stumped!

It's so so close you wouldn't believe me if I said so!

 

[Congax]

Where are all the masters of maths?

Sure, I could give you the answer. But you wouldn't learn from it, now would you?

 

[Lamp]

Sure, I could give you the answer. But you wouldn't learn from it, now would you?

Exactly

 

[Lamp]

http://xpmath.com/ebooks/files/Bob.Millers.Algebra.for.the.Clueless.2ed.Jul.2006--0071473661.pdf

 

[Bugz]

Considering i've been through about 20-30 of these questions and owned them all - minus this one - I wouldn't really call it a case of me not knowing the situation. I just want a second opinion on a question so I can see where I'm going wrong. The ones who don't know anything about it as the ones who throw out the comments tbh! :d

Oh and Sleez funny one! You belgians know nothing but how to be the bitch of france! :d