Can square roots be negative?Is $x=-2$ a solution of the equation $sqrt2-x=x$?Is the square root of a negative number defined?Comparing square roots of negative numbersWhy non-real means only the square root of negative?Taking the square root of an imaginary numberPolar form of a complex with square rootWhy doesn't multiplying square roots of imaginary numbers follow $sqrta times sqrtb = sqrtab$?Square root of complex numbersSquare of i ( imaginary number)Can roots of an algebraic equation be neither real nor complex?Finding the roots of polynomials of an imaginary degree

Numerically Stable IIR filter

Can I shorten this filter, that finds disk sizes over 100G?

Gold Battle KoTH

If I buy and download a game through second Nintendo account do I own it on my main account too?

Should 2FA be enabled on service accounts?

Why do we need a voltage divider when we get the same voltage at the output as the input?

Should I intervene when a colleague in a different department makes students run laps as part of their grade?

What Marvel character has this 'W' symbol?

Academic progression in Germany, what happens after a postdoc? What is the next step?

Why are prop blades not shaped like household fan blades?

Best practice for keeping temperature constant during film development at home

Why didn't General Martok receive discommendation in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine?

Applying for mortgage when living together but only one will be on the mortgage

What parameters are to be considered when choosing a MOSFET?

How to innovate in OR

Help me, I hate squares!

Best Ergonomic Design for a handheld ranged weapon

How do I respond appropriately to an overseas company that obtained a visa for me without hiring me?

How did Biff return to 2015 from 1955 without a lightning strike?

Patio gate not at right angle to the house

Was Donald Trump at ground zero helping out on 9-11?

May a hotel provide accommodation for fewer people than booked?

Should I put my name first or last in the team members list?

How to calculate points under the curve?



Can square roots be negative?


Is $x=-2$ a solution of the equation $sqrt2-x=x$?Is the square root of a negative number defined?Comparing square roots of negative numbersWhy non-real means only the square root of negative?Taking the square root of an imaginary numberPolar form of a complex with square rootWhy doesn't multiplying square roots of imaginary numbers follow $sqrta times sqrtb = sqrtab$?Square root of complex numbersSquare of i ( imaginary number)Can roots of an algebraic equation be neither real nor complex?Finding the roots of polynomials of an imaginary degree






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2












$begingroup$


1955 AHMSE Problem 20 asks when $sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0.$



I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real.



But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not. I think square roots can never be negative. Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative.



Can square roots of imaginary numbers be negative?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
    $endgroup$
    – imranfat
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
    $endgroup$
    – David
    8 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
    $endgroup$
    – herb steinberg
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago

















2












$begingroup$


1955 AHMSE Problem 20 asks when $sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0.$



I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real.



But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not. I think square roots can never be negative. Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative.



Can square roots of imaginary numbers be negative?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
    $endgroup$
    – imranfat
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
    $endgroup$
    – David
    8 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
    $endgroup$
    – herb steinberg
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago













2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


1955 AHMSE Problem 20 asks when $sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0.$



I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real.



But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not. I think square roots can never be negative. Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative.



Can square roots of imaginary numbers be negative?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




1955 AHMSE Problem 20 asks when $sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0.$



I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real.



But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not. I think square roots can never be negative. Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative.



Can square roots of imaginary numbers be negative?







complex-numbers






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 8 hours ago









saulspatz

22.5k4 gold badges16 silver badges38 bronze badges




22.5k4 gold badges16 silver badges38 bronze badges










asked 8 hours ago









Ram KeswaniRam Keswani

3894 silver badges15 bronze badges




3894 silver badges15 bronze badges










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
    $endgroup$
    – imranfat
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
    $endgroup$
    – David
    8 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
    $endgroup$
    – herb steinberg
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
    $endgroup$
    – imranfat
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
    $endgroup$
    – David
    8 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
    $endgroup$
    – herb steinberg
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
$endgroup$
– imranfat
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
You are right that imaginary numbers cannot be classified as positives or negatives. As for your other questions, have you looked into a pre calculus book lately?
$endgroup$
– imranfat
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
$endgroup$
– David
8 hours ago





$begingroup$
Imaginary numbers are quite simple to understand. Just let $i$ be a number such that $i^2=-1$ and operate with them is a normal fashion (for instance: $(3+4i) + (1+2i) = 4+6i$; similarly, $(3+4i) cdot (1+2i) = 3+4i+6i+8i^2=3-8+10i=-5+10i$
$endgroup$
– David
8 hours ago













$begingroup$
@calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
$endgroup$
– herb steinberg
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
@calicus Imoved my comment to answer. Positive only is a convention, not a mathematical truth.
$endgroup$
– herb steinberg
8 hours ago




2




2




$begingroup$
It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
$endgroup$
– callculus
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
It is true that $x^2=25⇒x_1,2=±5$. But $25$ is just $sqrt5$
$endgroup$
– callculus
7 hours ago




2




2




$begingroup$
I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
$endgroup$
– Adam Rubinson
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
I agree with callculus, apart from the typo
$endgroup$
– Adam Rubinson
7 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

We get from your equation $$sqrt25-t^2=-5$$ since $$sqrt25-t^2geq 0$$ for $$25-t^2geq 0$$ so we get no solution.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
    $endgroup$
    – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago


















2












$begingroup$

Read carefully the first paragraph of what wikipedia has to say about square roots, noting the difference between the definitions of "square root" and "principal square root":



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root



$sqrtx $ doesn't mean "square root of x". $sqrtx $ means, by definition, $mathitthe principal square root $ of x, which means, $mathitthe square root of x with positive real part $ . Note that this definition can be applied to complex numbers also, e.g. for the following A-Level question:



enter image description here



if we did not require the principal square root to have a positive real part, then the answer would be: Solutions are 7-3i and -7+3i, whereas given the definition of principal square root, which is standard convention, we must throw away -7+3i, but keep 7-3i as a solution.



4 and −4 are square roots of 16.



However, $sqrt16 = 4$, $mathitnot pm 4$.



For further evidence in favour of my understanding of the conventional meaning of $sqrt $, In Rudin's PMA, Theorem 1.21 states:



For every real $x > 0$ and every integer $n > 0$ there is one and only one real y such that $y^n = x$. The number y is written $sqrt[n]x $ or $ x^1/n$.



Going back to the original questions,



"I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real."



I agree.



"But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not."



All complex numbers have two square roots (though they may be repeats). An imaginary number like $9i$ will be have two complex square roots. This is true for complex numbers also- they too have two complex square roots.



I actually think what you meant to ask here was, "can we square root a $mathitnegative$ number?" In the complex realm, yes, but we have to be careful if we are calculating the principal square root and are using the $sqrt $ sign. see:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit#Proper_use



for why and when we have to be careful.



-4 has two complex square roots, namely $2i$ and $-2i$. Since the real part of both of these square roots is 0, either both or neither are considered principal square roots, depending on if you define the principal square root to be non-negative or strictly positive. To be honest I'm not sure, but if I had to guess, I would say they are both principal square roots of -4. I'm open to clarification on this point though.



If you ask if a number is negative, then in this context you are implicitly implying the number is real and negative, or integer and negative etc, because only real/integer/etc numbers can be negative. Complex numbers with imaginary part not equal to 0 cannot be negative in and of themselves, however, their $mathit real / imaginary parts $ can be negative.



"I think square roots can never be negative."



Square roots of real numbers can be negative. -4 is a square root of 16. But remember: $sqrtx$ means the $mathitprincipal$ square root of x, not just the square root of x. You would be correct to say, "the principal square root of a real number cannot be negative"



"Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative."



Correct. But like I said you $mathitcan$ talk about their $mathit real / imaginary parts $






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
    $endgroup$
    – LegionMammal978
    10 mins ago


















1












$begingroup$

Let's begin with $sqrt25+t^2+5=0implies sqrt25+t^2=-5.$ If we square both sides, we get $25+t^2=25implies t^2=25-25=0implies t=0.$ Zero is real so $t$ is real.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis See this wiki article
    $endgroup$
    – rschwieb
    6 hours ago


















1












$begingroup$

Did someone read the original question? Since
$$sqrt25-t^2=-5Rightarrow 25-t^2=25iff t=0$$
and zero is no solution to the original equation, option (a) is the right answer.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$






















    0












    $begingroup$

    All numbers have two square roots. By convention the positive square root is assumed to be the square root for positive reals. However in your example $t=0$ is O.K., since $sqrt25=pm 5$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$










    • 2




      $begingroup$
      I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
      $endgroup$
      – Adam Rubinson
      7 hours ago











    • $begingroup$
      The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
      $endgroup$
      – herb steinberg
      6 hours ago


















    0












    $begingroup$

    You can use the third binomial formula to see that $t=0$ is no solution.



    $$sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0$$



    $$sqrt25 - t^2 =- 5 $$



    $$sqrt5 - tcdot sqrt5+t =- 5 $$



    $$sqrt5cdot sqrt5 =- 5 $$



    $$5 =- 5 qquad colorredtimes$$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      7 hours ago











    • $begingroup$
      But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      7 hours ago














    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3310604%2fcan-square-roots-be-negative%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes








    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    We get from your equation $$sqrt25-t^2=-5$$ since $$sqrt25-t^2geq 0$$ for $$25-t^2geq 0$$ so we get no solution.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
      $endgroup$
      – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago















    2












    $begingroup$

    We get from your equation $$sqrt25-t^2=-5$$ since $$sqrt25-t^2geq 0$$ for $$25-t^2geq 0$$ so we get no solution.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
      $endgroup$
      – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago













    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    We get from your equation $$sqrt25-t^2=-5$$ since $$sqrt25-t^2geq 0$$ for $$25-t^2geq 0$$ so we get no solution.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    We get from your equation $$sqrt25-t^2=-5$$ since $$sqrt25-t^2geq 0$$ for $$25-t^2geq 0$$ so we get no solution.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 8 hours ago









    Dr. Sonnhard GraubnerDr. Sonnhard Graubner

    86.1k4 gold badges29 silver badges69 bronze badges




    86.1k4 gold badges29 silver badges69 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
      $endgroup$
      – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago
















    • $begingroup$
      The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
      $endgroup$
      – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago















    $begingroup$
    The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    8 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    The first assumption is not correct. You can begin with $ngt 0$ but $sqrtn^2=pm n$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    8 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
    $endgroup$
    – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
    8 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    It is $$sqrtx^2=|x|geq 0$$ so you are not correct!
    $endgroup$
    – Dr. Sonnhard Graubner
    8 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    8 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @Dr.SonnhardGraubner I agree to you.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    8 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @Dr. Sonnhard Graubner I have found situations I cannot remember where $sqrtn^2=pm n$ yields the right answer only by taking the negative of the square root.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago













    2












    $begingroup$

    Read carefully the first paragraph of what wikipedia has to say about square roots, noting the difference between the definitions of "square root" and "principal square root":



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root



    $sqrtx $ doesn't mean "square root of x". $sqrtx $ means, by definition, $mathitthe principal square root $ of x, which means, $mathitthe square root of x with positive real part $ . Note that this definition can be applied to complex numbers also, e.g. for the following A-Level question:



    enter image description here



    if we did not require the principal square root to have a positive real part, then the answer would be: Solutions are 7-3i and -7+3i, whereas given the definition of principal square root, which is standard convention, we must throw away -7+3i, but keep 7-3i as a solution.



    4 and −4 are square roots of 16.



    However, $sqrt16 = 4$, $mathitnot pm 4$.



    For further evidence in favour of my understanding of the conventional meaning of $sqrt $, In Rudin's PMA, Theorem 1.21 states:



    For every real $x > 0$ and every integer $n > 0$ there is one and only one real y such that $y^n = x$. The number y is written $sqrt[n]x $ or $ x^1/n$.



    Going back to the original questions,



    "I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real."



    I agree.



    "But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not."



    All complex numbers have two square roots (though they may be repeats). An imaginary number like $9i$ will be have two complex square roots. This is true for complex numbers also- they too have two complex square roots.



    I actually think what you meant to ask here was, "can we square root a $mathitnegative$ number?" In the complex realm, yes, but we have to be careful if we are calculating the principal square root and are using the $sqrt $ sign. see:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit#Proper_use



    for why and when we have to be careful.



    -4 has two complex square roots, namely $2i$ and $-2i$. Since the real part of both of these square roots is 0, either both or neither are considered principal square roots, depending on if you define the principal square root to be non-negative or strictly positive. To be honest I'm not sure, but if I had to guess, I would say they are both principal square roots of -4. I'm open to clarification on this point though.



    If you ask if a number is negative, then in this context you are implicitly implying the number is real and negative, or integer and negative etc, because only real/integer/etc numbers can be negative. Complex numbers with imaginary part not equal to 0 cannot be negative in and of themselves, however, their $mathit real / imaginary parts $ can be negative.



    "I think square roots can never be negative."



    Square roots of real numbers can be negative. -4 is a square root of 16. But remember: $sqrtx$ means the $mathitprincipal$ square root of x, not just the square root of x. You would be correct to say, "the principal square root of a real number cannot be negative"



    "Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative."



    Correct. But like I said you $mathitcan$ talk about their $mathit real / imaginary parts $






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
      $endgroup$
      – LegionMammal978
      10 mins ago















    2












    $begingroup$

    Read carefully the first paragraph of what wikipedia has to say about square roots, noting the difference between the definitions of "square root" and "principal square root":



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root



    $sqrtx $ doesn't mean "square root of x". $sqrtx $ means, by definition, $mathitthe principal square root $ of x, which means, $mathitthe square root of x with positive real part $ . Note that this definition can be applied to complex numbers also, e.g. for the following A-Level question:



    enter image description here



    if we did not require the principal square root to have a positive real part, then the answer would be: Solutions are 7-3i and -7+3i, whereas given the definition of principal square root, which is standard convention, we must throw away -7+3i, but keep 7-3i as a solution.



    4 and −4 are square roots of 16.



    However, $sqrt16 = 4$, $mathitnot pm 4$.



    For further evidence in favour of my understanding of the conventional meaning of $sqrt $, In Rudin's PMA, Theorem 1.21 states:



    For every real $x > 0$ and every integer $n > 0$ there is one and only one real y such that $y^n = x$. The number y is written $sqrt[n]x $ or $ x^1/n$.



    Going back to the original questions,



    "I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real."



    I agree.



    "But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not."



    All complex numbers have two square roots (though they may be repeats). An imaginary number like $9i$ will be have two complex square roots. This is true for complex numbers also- they too have two complex square roots.



    I actually think what you meant to ask here was, "can we square root a $mathitnegative$ number?" In the complex realm, yes, but we have to be careful if we are calculating the principal square root and are using the $sqrt $ sign. see:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit#Proper_use



    for why and when we have to be careful.



    -4 has two complex square roots, namely $2i$ and $-2i$. Since the real part of both of these square roots is 0, either both or neither are considered principal square roots, depending on if you define the principal square root to be non-negative or strictly positive. To be honest I'm not sure, but if I had to guess, I would say they are both principal square roots of -4. I'm open to clarification on this point though.



    If you ask if a number is negative, then in this context you are implicitly implying the number is real and negative, or integer and negative etc, because only real/integer/etc numbers can be negative. Complex numbers with imaginary part not equal to 0 cannot be negative in and of themselves, however, their $mathit real / imaginary parts $ can be negative.



    "I think square roots can never be negative."



    Square roots of real numbers can be negative. -4 is a square root of 16. But remember: $sqrtx$ means the $mathitprincipal$ square root of x, not just the square root of x. You would be correct to say, "the principal square root of a real number cannot be negative"



    "Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative."



    Correct. But like I said you $mathitcan$ talk about their $mathit real / imaginary parts $






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
      $endgroup$
      – LegionMammal978
      10 mins ago













    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    Read carefully the first paragraph of what wikipedia has to say about square roots, noting the difference between the definitions of "square root" and "principal square root":



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root



    $sqrtx $ doesn't mean "square root of x". $sqrtx $ means, by definition, $mathitthe principal square root $ of x, which means, $mathitthe square root of x with positive real part $ . Note that this definition can be applied to complex numbers also, e.g. for the following A-Level question:



    enter image description here



    if we did not require the principal square root to have a positive real part, then the answer would be: Solutions are 7-3i and -7+3i, whereas given the definition of principal square root, which is standard convention, we must throw away -7+3i, but keep 7-3i as a solution.



    4 and −4 are square roots of 16.



    However, $sqrt16 = 4$, $mathitnot pm 4$.



    For further evidence in favour of my understanding of the conventional meaning of $sqrt $, In Rudin's PMA, Theorem 1.21 states:



    For every real $x > 0$ and every integer $n > 0$ there is one and only one real y such that $y^n = x$. The number y is written $sqrt[n]x $ or $ x^1/n$.



    Going back to the original questions,



    "I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real."



    I agree.



    "But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not."



    All complex numbers have two square roots (though they may be repeats). An imaginary number like $9i$ will be have two complex square roots. This is true for complex numbers also- they too have two complex square roots.



    I actually think what you meant to ask here was, "can we square root a $mathitnegative$ number?" In the complex realm, yes, but we have to be careful if we are calculating the principal square root and are using the $sqrt $ sign. see:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit#Proper_use



    for why and when we have to be careful.



    -4 has two complex square roots, namely $2i$ and $-2i$. Since the real part of both of these square roots is 0, either both or neither are considered principal square roots, depending on if you define the principal square root to be non-negative or strictly positive. To be honest I'm not sure, but if I had to guess, I would say they are both principal square roots of -4. I'm open to clarification on this point though.



    If you ask if a number is negative, then in this context you are implicitly implying the number is real and negative, or integer and negative etc, because only real/integer/etc numbers can be negative. Complex numbers with imaginary part not equal to 0 cannot be negative in and of themselves, however, their $mathit real / imaginary parts $ can be negative.



    "I think square roots can never be negative."



    Square roots of real numbers can be negative. -4 is a square root of 16. But remember: $sqrtx$ means the $mathitprincipal$ square root of x, not just the square root of x. You would be correct to say, "the principal square root of a real number cannot be negative"



    "Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative."



    Correct. But like I said you $mathitcan$ talk about their $mathit real / imaginary parts $






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Read carefully the first paragraph of what wikipedia has to say about square roots, noting the difference between the definitions of "square root" and "principal square root":



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root



    $sqrtx $ doesn't mean "square root of x". $sqrtx $ means, by definition, $mathitthe principal square root $ of x, which means, $mathitthe square root of x with positive real part $ . Note that this definition can be applied to complex numbers also, e.g. for the following A-Level question:



    enter image description here



    if we did not require the principal square root to have a positive real part, then the answer would be: Solutions are 7-3i and -7+3i, whereas given the definition of principal square root, which is standard convention, we must throw away -7+3i, but keep 7-3i as a solution.



    4 and −4 are square roots of 16.



    However, $sqrt16 = 4$, $mathitnot pm 4$.



    For further evidence in favour of my understanding of the conventional meaning of $sqrt $, In Rudin's PMA, Theorem 1.21 states:



    For every real $x > 0$ and every integer $n > 0$ there is one and only one real y such that $y^n = x$. The number y is written $sqrt[n]x $ or $ x^1/n$.



    Going back to the original questions,



    "I know square root of real numbers cannot be negative. So t cannot be real."



    I agree.



    "But I don't know whether imaginary numbers' square root can be negative or not."



    All complex numbers have two square roots (though they may be repeats). An imaginary number like $9i$ will be have two complex square roots. This is true for complex numbers also- they too have two complex square roots.



    I actually think what you meant to ask here was, "can we square root a $mathitnegative$ number?" In the complex realm, yes, but we have to be careful if we are calculating the principal square root and are using the $sqrt $ sign. see:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit#Proper_use



    for why and when we have to be careful.



    -4 has two complex square roots, namely $2i$ and $-2i$. Since the real part of both of these square roots is 0, either both or neither are considered principal square roots, depending on if you define the principal square root to be non-negative or strictly positive. To be honest I'm not sure, but if I had to guess, I would say they are both principal square roots of -4. I'm open to clarification on this point though.



    If you ask if a number is negative, then in this context you are implicitly implying the number is real and negative, or integer and negative etc, because only real/integer/etc numbers can be negative. Complex numbers with imaginary part not equal to 0 cannot be negative in and of themselves, however, their $mathit real / imaginary parts $ can be negative.



    "I think square roots can never be negative."



    Square roots of real numbers can be negative. -4 is a square root of 16. But remember: $sqrtx$ means the $mathitprincipal$ square root of x, not just the square root of x. You would be correct to say, "the principal square root of a real number cannot be negative"



    "Also, I don't think we can classify imaginary numbers as positive or negative."



    Correct. But like I said you $mathitcan$ talk about their $mathit real / imaginary parts $







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited 3 hours ago

























    answered 7 hours ago









    Adam RubinsonAdam Rubinson

    7906 silver badges16 bronze badges




    7906 silver badges16 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
      $endgroup$
      – LegionMammal978
      10 mins ago
















    • $begingroup$
      I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
      $endgroup$
      – LegionMammal978
      10 mins ago















    $begingroup$
    I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
    $endgroup$
    – LegionMammal978
    10 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    I don't get where the claim of "one and only one real $y$" comes from. Just take $x=4$, $n=2$, and $2^2=(-2)^2=4$, with $y=pm2$. Did you perhaps mean "one and only one real $y>0$"?
    $endgroup$
    – LegionMammal978
    10 mins ago











    1












    $begingroup$

    Let's begin with $sqrt25+t^2+5=0implies sqrt25+t^2=-5.$ If we square both sides, we get $25+t^2=25implies t^2=25-25=0implies t=0.$ Zero is real so $t$ is real.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Adam Rubinson
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @poetasis See this wiki article
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      6 hours ago















    1












    $begingroup$

    Let's begin with $sqrt25+t^2+5=0implies sqrt25+t^2=-5.$ If we square both sides, we get $25+t^2=25implies t^2=25-25=0implies t=0.$ Zero is real so $t$ is real.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Adam Rubinson
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @poetasis See this wiki article
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      6 hours ago













    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    Let's begin with $sqrt25+t^2+5=0implies sqrt25+t^2=-5.$ If we square both sides, we get $25+t^2=25implies t^2=25-25=0implies t=0.$ Zero is real so $t$ is real.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Let's begin with $sqrt25+t^2+5=0implies sqrt25+t^2=-5.$ If we square both sides, we get $25+t^2=25implies t^2=25-25=0implies t=0.$ Zero is real so $t$ is real.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 7 hours ago









    poetasispoetasis

    6971 gold badge3 silver badges19 bronze badges




    6971 gold badge3 silver badges19 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Adam Rubinson
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @poetasis See this wiki article
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      6 hours ago
















    • $begingroup$
      'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
      $endgroup$
      – poetasis
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Adam Rubinson
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
      $endgroup$
      – callculus
      7 hours ago







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @poetasis See this wiki article
      $endgroup$
      – rschwieb
      6 hours ago















    $begingroup$
    'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    'squaring' is not an equivalent term transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    However you figure it, the only value of $t$ that works is zero and zero is real. No other values under the radical will give you $pm 5$.
    $endgroup$
    – poetasis
    7 hours ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    This issue here seems to be some people believe $sqrt25 = 5$ by definition, whereas others say $sqrt25 = pm 5$, i.e. +5 or -5. Going by Rudin's PMA and wikipedia, the former seems to be the accepted convention/definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Adam Rubinson
    7 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago





    $begingroup$
    @AdamRubinson In general the value of the number $sqrta$ has to be unique, otherwise we would run into a chaos.
    $endgroup$
    – callculus
    7 hours ago





    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis See this wiki article
    $endgroup$
    – rschwieb
    6 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis See this wiki article
    $endgroup$
    – rschwieb
    6 hours ago











    1












    $begingroup$

    Did someone read the original question? Since
    $$sqrt25-t^2=-5Rightarrow 25-t^2=25iff t=0$$
    and zero is no solution to the original equation, option (a) is the right answer.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



















      1












      $begingroup$

      Did someone read the original question? Since
      $$sqrt25-t^2=-5Rightarrow 25-t^2=25iff t=0$$
      and zero is no solution to the original equation, option (a) is the right answer.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$

















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Did someone read the original question? Since
        $$sqrt25-t^2=-5Rightarrow 25-t^2=25iff t=0$$
        and zero is no solution to the original equation, option (a) is the right answer.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Did someone read the original question? Since
        $$sqrt25-t^2=-5Rightarrow 25-t^2=25iff t=0$$
        and zero is no solution to the original equation, option (a) is the right answer.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 7 hours ago









        Michael HoppeMichael Hoppe

        11.9k3 gold badges19 silver badges38 bronze badges




        11.9k3 gold badges19 silver badges38 bronze badges
























            0












            $begingroup$

            All numbers have two square roots. By convention the positive square root is assumed to be the square root for positive reals. However in your example $t=0$ is O.K., since $sqrt25=pm 5$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$










            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
              $endgroup$
              – Adam Rubinson
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
              $endgroup$
              – herb steinberg
              6 hours ago















            0












            $begingroup$

            All numbers have two square roots. By convention the positive square root is assumed to be the square root for positive reals. However in your example $t=0$ is O.K., since $sqrt25=pm 5$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$










            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
              $endgroup$
              – Adam Rubinson
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
              $endgroup$
              – herb steinberg
              6 hours ago













            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            All numbers have two square roots. By convention the positive square root is assumed to be the square root for positive reals. However in your example $t=0$ is O.K., since $sqrt25=pm 5$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            All numbers have two square roots. By convention the positive square root is assumed to be the square root for positive reals. However in your example $t=0$ is O.K., since $sqrt25=pm 5$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 8 hours ago









            herb steinbergherb steinberg

            4,4842 gold badges3 silver badges12 bronze badges




            4,4842 gold badges3 silver badges12 bronze badges










            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
              $endgroup$
              – Adam Rubinson
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
              $endgroup$
              – herb steinberg
              6 hours ago












            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
              $endgroup$
              – Adam Rubinson
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
              $endgroup$
              – herb steinberg
              6 hours ago







            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Rubinson
            7 hours ago





            $begingroup$
            I don't get it. In your first sentence you basically say $sqrt25=5.$ In your second sentence you say $sqrt25=pm5.$ Which is it?
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Rubinson
            7 hours ago













            $begingroup$
            The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
            $endgroup$
            – herb steinberg
            6 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            The distinction is between convention $sqrt25=5$ and reality $sqrt25=pm5$.
            $endgroup$
            – herb steinberg
            6 hours ago











            0












            $begingroup$

            You can use the third binomial formula to see that $t=0$ is no solution.



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0$$



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5 - tcdot sqrt5+t =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5cdot sqrt5 =- 5 $$



            $$5 =- 5 qquad colorredtimes$$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$














            • $begingroup$
              "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago
















            0












            $begingroup$

            You can use the third binomial formula to see that $t=0$ is no solution.



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0$$



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5 - tcdot sqrt5+t =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5cdot sqrt5 =- 5 $$



            $$5 =- 5 qquad colorredtimes$$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$














            • $begingroup$
              "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            You can use the third binomial formula to see that $t=0$ is no solution.



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0$$



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5 - tcdot sqrt5+t =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5cdot sqrt5 =- 5 $$



            $$5 =- 5 qquad colorredtimes$$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            You can use the third binomial formula to see that $t=0$ is no solution.



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 + 5 =0$$



            $$sqrt25 - t^2 =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5 - tcdot sqrt5+t =- 5 $$



            $$sqrt5cdot sqrt5 =- 5 $$



            $$5 =- 5 qquad colorredtimes$$







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 8 hours ago









            callculuscallculus

            20k3 gold badges17 silver badges32 bronze badges




            20k3 gold badges17 silver badges32 bronze badges














            • $begingroup$
              "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago

















            • $begingroup$
              "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
              $endgroup$
              – callculus
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
              $endgroup$
              – rschwieb
              7 hours ago
















            $begingroup$
            "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            "third binomial formula"? What is that supposed to be? Even if I guess it is the difference-of-squares formula, what's the point of using it? You could just substitute $0$ in at the beginning and skip from line 1 to line 4.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
            $endgroup$
            – callculus
            7 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            I just wanted to make clear that $t=0$ is no solution. That´s the way I´ve chosen.
            $endgroup$
            – callculus
            7 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago





            $begingroup$
            I know, I'm just pointing out you included an unnecessarily complicated step when doing that. Unless you have some qualms about what $25-0^2$ is or something.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago













            $begingroup$
            But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
            $endgroup$
            – callculus
            7 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            But it doesn´t seem so clear that $t=0$ is no solution if you look at the comments and answers here.
            $endgroup$
            – callculus
            7 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago





            $begingroup$
            I think we're both very clear on all the other comments and questions, but it seems as if you didn't read the first comment in this thread at all... ;) I didn't say anything was wrong with your choice of strategy, I'm just saying you added complication that isn't necessary.
            $endgroup$
            – rschwieb
            7 hours ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3310604%2fcan-square-roots-be-negative%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її