Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday July 06 2020, @03:09PM   Printer-friendly
from the math-simplified dept.

Math Genius Has Come Up With a Wildly Simple New Way to Solve Quadratic Equations:

If you studied algebra in high school (or you're learning it right now), there's a good chance you're familiar with the quadratic formula. If not, it's possible you repressed it.

By this point, billions of us have had to learn, memorise, and implement this unwieldy algorithm in order to solve quadratic equations, but according to mathematician Po-Shen Loh from Carnegie Mellon University, there's actually been an easier and better way all along, although it's remained almost entirely hidden for thousands of years.

In a 2019 research paper, Loh celebrates the quadratic formula as a "remarkable triumph of early mathematicians" dating back to the beginnings of the Old Babylonian Period around 2000 BCE, but also freely acknowledges some of its ancient shortcomings.

"It is unfortunate that for billions of people worldwide, the quadratic formula is also their first (and perhaps only) experience of a rather complicated formula which they must memorise," Loh writes.

[...] We still don't know how this escaped wider notice for millennia, but if Loh's instincts are right, maths textbooks could be on the verge of a historic rewriting - and we don't take textbook-changing discoveries lightly.

"I wanted to share it as widely as possible with the world," Loh says, "because it can demystify a complicated part of maths that makes many people feel that maybe maths is not for them."

The research paper is available at pre-print website arXiv.org, and you can read Po-Shen Loh's generalised explanation of the simple proof here.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by HiThere on Tuesday July 07 2020, @12:30AM (3 children)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 07 2020, @12:30AM (#1017427) Journal

    IIRC the -b should not be included within the parenthesis.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 07 2020, @02:17AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 07 2020, @02:17AM (#1017464)

    -b(etter?)

  • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday July 07 2020, @01:48PM (1 child)

    by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday July 07 2020, @01:48PM (#1017630)

    It definitely should be: in the traditional "math form" writing the -b is in the numerator while 2a is the denominator. Take the -b out of the parenthesis and it will no longer be in the numerator.

    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday July 07 2020, @08:12PM

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 07 2020, @08:12PM (#1017848) Journal

      My mistake. It's been a long time since I used the formula, and I guess I mis-remembered it. (I.e., I did remember it, but the memory was wrong.)

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.