Rational equation: solve 5/y = 3/(7y) + 4/(11y) - 8

Quadratic equations and inequalities, variation equations, function notation, systems of equations, etc.
TehNyanCat
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:01 pm
Contact:

Rational equation: solve 5/y = 3/(7y) + 4/(11y) - 8

Postby TehNyanCat » Sat Jun 18, 2011 8:46 pm


I don't know how to solve this.
I tried multiplying the whole thing by 77y to cancel out the denominators, but I don't think it's working. Am I supposed to do that?
Last edited by TehNyanCat on Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
stapel_eliz
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:22 pm
Contact:

Postby stapel_eliz » Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:36 pm

TehNyanCat wrote:
I don't know how to solve this.
I tried multiplying the whole thing by 77y to cancel out the denominators, but I don't think it's working. Am I supposed to do that?

Yes, multiplying through is a good first step. What did you get? :wink:

TehNyanCat
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:01 pm
Contact:

Re:

Postby TehNyanCat » Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:19 am

stapel_eliz wrote:
TehNyanCat wrote:
I don't know how to solve this.
I tried multiplying the whole thing by 77y to cancel out the denominators, but I don't think it's working. Am I supposed to do that?

Yes, multiplying through is a good first step. What did you get? :wink:


I got .

User avatar
stapel_eliz
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:22 pm
Contact:

Postby stapel_eliz » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:24 am

stapel_eliz wrote:Yes, multiplying through is a good first step. What did you get? :wink:

TehNyanCat wrote:I got .

How did you multiply through by "77y" and still have "y" in the denominator? :confused:

TehNyanCat
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:01 pm
Contact:

Re:

Postby TehNyanCat » Mon Jun 20, 2011 4:42 pm

stapel_eliz wrote:
stapel_eliz wrote:Yes, multiplying through is a good first step. What did you get? :wink:

TehNyanCat wrote:I got .

How did you multiply through by "77y" and still have "y" in the denominator? :confused:


Wait a sec...
I think it's actually 385=33+28-616y. Which, simplified, would be 324=-616y. Then, if the right hand side is divided by -616, the left side would be something like , right?

User avatar
stapel_eliz
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:22 pm
Contact:

Postby stapel_eliz » Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:09 pm

TehNyanCat wrote:I think it's actually 385=33+28-616y. Which, simplified, would be 324=-616y. Then, if the right hand side is divided by -616, the left side would be something like , right?

The solution to any "solving" problem may be checked by plugging it back into the original exercise. What do you get when you plug in "-324/616" (after simplifying, of course!)? :wink:

TehNyanCat
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Re:

Postby TehNyanCat » Tue Jun 21, 2011 5:49 pm

stapel_eliz wrote:
TehNyanCat wrote:I think it's actually 385=33+28-616y. Which, simplified, would be 324=-616y. Then, if the right hand side is divided by -616, the left side would be something like , right?

The solution to any "solving" problem may be checked by plugging it back into the original exercise. What do you get when you plug in "-324/616" (after simplifying, of course!)? :wink:

is the most reduced I can get. So I plug it back in... and oh no...
In LaTeX form, this equation would be waaay too long, so I'm just gonna put in an image:
Image
This just got really frustrating. Any advice on what to do first?

User avatar
stapel_eliz
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:22 pm
Contact:

Postby stapel_eliz » Tue Jun 21, 2011 6:26 pm

TehNyanCat wrote: is the most reduced I can get. So I plug it back in... and oh no...

That's the same value I get. Try plugging the whole messy thing into your graphing calculator (where you can use parentheses) or a spreadsheet like Excel. :wink:


Return to “Intermediate Algebra”

cron