Please post a response to one peer who chose a different topic. Then watch the video your peer reviewed. Base your responses on your peer’s review and your own thoughts about the same video.
In the response post, include the following:
· Comment on your peer’s synopsis.
· Do you feel it was complete – why/why not?
· What additional information about the video would you suggest?
· Locate, identify, and comment on the area of your peer’s chosen video you feel could have been explained better (in the video) and share your ideas for an alternate explanation.
· Discuss whether your area of concern in your peer’s chosen video is different than the area your peer shared.
· If the same, how does your alternate explanation differ from theirs?
· If different, offer an alternative explanation to the video’s and your peer’s.
Please be sure to validate your opinions and ideas with citations and references in APA format.
Estimated time to complete: 1 hour
I watched a video from Math Power on YouTube about Dividing Radial Expressions without variables (Basic with no rationalizing). The presenter in this video used two examples of dividing radicals and simplifying. This presenter used an example of 75÷16, so first, we will see if the fraction given can be facilitated by looking at the two numbers 75 and 16. By looking for the two common factors of 75 and 16, it is 1, so it doesn’t simplify.
The highlight of this video, I liked is how The presenter went on to explain you will apply the radical property in which is for any real numbers a and b (b ∓
0) and any positive integer, and how he explained how to simplify radical expressions so its no fracture under the square and no square root in the denominator, and then the division radical is simplified. So a÷b=ab, so since 75÷16, it is not simplified if there is a fraction under the radical or a radical in the denominator. The presenter simplified the numerator and denominator separately. We are looking for the perfect square root factors of the radicals, so 75=3*5*5 so 75 contains the perfect square, and 16=4*4, so 16 is a perfect square. So the square of 5 squared simplified perfectly to 1 factor 5, and the square of 4, is simplified perfectly to 1 factor of 4, so the expression simplifies to 53, so 5 square of 3, and divided by 4, so its no fracture under the square root, and no square root in the denominator, so now its simplified. The presenter in this video explained how to divide radical expressions by step by step, and also gave another example of another expression in the video ex. 3324÷4, explained how we look for prime factors in which would be 4, so 4÷ 324 =81, and 4 ÷4=1, so 381÷1, which is 381. So the prime factor of 81 will be 33*3*3*3=33 squared times 3. The simplified answer will be 3 squared and the square root of 3. The presenter showed how it’s not a fraction under the square root and no square root in the denominator.
The presenter could have explained how to divide a radical expression containing a variable with rationalizing so the viewer could see the difference between dividing radicals with and without radicals and rationalization. But the overall video I enjoyed was how the presenter showed the viewer the step-by-step division of radical expressions and how to simplify using two great examples. This was a great video, and I learned from the presenter how to divide radical expressions without variables.
Reference:
Dividing Radicals without Variables (Basic with no rationalizing)Links to an external site.
This video explains how to divide basic radicals. No rationalizing of the denominator is required.
to an external site.
