<< Chapter < Page Chapter >> Page >
This module teaches about multiplying binomials. Specifically about common patterns that can be memorized and using the "FOIL" method.

The following three formulae should be memorized.

x + a 2 = x 2 + 2 ax + a 2 size 12{ left (x+a right ) rSup { size 8{2} } =x rSup { size 8{2} } +2 ital "ax"+a rSup { size 8{2} } } {}
x a 2 = x 2 2 ax + a 2 size 12{ left (x - a right ) rSup { size 8{2} } =x rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 ital "ax"+a rSup { size 8{2} } } {}
x + a x a = x 2 a 2 size 12{ left (x+a right ) left (x - a right )=x rSup { size 8{2} } - a rSup { size 8{2} } } {}

It is important to have these three formulae on the top of your head. It is also nice to be able to show why these formulae work, for instance by using FOIL. But the most important thing of all is knowing what these three formulae mean, and how to use them .

These three are all “algebraic generalizations,” as discussed in the first unit on functions. That is, they are equations that hold true for any values of x size 12{x} {} and a size 12{a} {} . It may help if you think of the second equation above as standing for:

Anthing Anything Else 2 = Anything 2 2 Anything Else 2 size 12{ left ("Anthing" - "Anything Else" right ) rSup { size 8{2} } ="Anything" rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 left ("Anything Else" right ) rSup { size 8{2} } } {} For instance, suppose the Anything (or x size 12{x} {} ) is 5, and the Anything Else (or a size 12{a} {} ) is 3.

x a 2 = x 2 2 ax + a 2 size 12{ left (x - a right ) rSup { size 8{2} } =x rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 ital "ax"+a rSup { size 8{2} } } {} , when x = 5 size 12{x=5} {} , a = 3 size 12{a=3} {} .

  • 5 3 2 = ? 5 2 2 3 5 + 3 2 size 12{5 - 3 rSup { size 8{2} } { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } 5 rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 left (3 right ) left (5 right )+3 rSup { size 8{2} } } {}
  • 2 2 = ? 25 30 + 9 size 12{2 rSup { size 8{2} } { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } "25" - "30"+9} {}
  • 4 = 4 size 12{4=4} {}

It worked! Now, let’s leave the Anything as x size 12{x} {} , but play with different values of a size 12{a} {} .

More examples of x a 2 = x 2 2 ax + a 2 size 12{ left (x - a right ) rSup { size 8{2} } =x rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 ital "ax"+a rSup { size 8{2} } } {}

a = 1 : ( x - 1 ) 2 = x 2 - 2 x + 1 a = 2 : ( x - 2 ) 2 = x 2 - 4 x + 4 a = 3 : ( x - 3 ) 2 = x 2 - 6 x + 9 a = 5 : ( x - 5 ) 2 = x 2 - 10 x + 25 a = 10 : ( x - 10 ) 2 = x 2 - 20 x + 100

Once you’ve seen a few of these, the pattern becomes evident: the number doubles to create the middle term (the coefficient of x size 12{x} {} ), and squares to create the final term (the number).

The hardest thing about this formula is remembering to use it . For instance, suppose you are asked to expand:

2y 6 2 size 12{ left (2y - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } } {}

There are three ways you can approach this.

2y 6 2 , computed three different ways
Square each term FOIL Using the formula above
2y 6 2 2y 2 2 6 2y + 6 2 4y 2 24 y + 36 size 12{ matrix { {} # left (2y - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} ##={} {} # left (2y right ) rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 left (6 right ) left (2y right )+6 rSup { size 8{2} } {} ## ={} {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "24"y+"36"{}} } {} 2y 6 2y 6 2y 2y 2y 6 2y 6 + 36 4y 2 12 y 12 y + 36 4y 2 24 y + 36 size 12{ matrix { {} # left (2y - 6 right ) left (2y - 6 right ) {} ##={} {} # left (2y right ) left (2y right ) - left (2y right )6 - left (2y right )6+"36" {} ## ={} {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "12"y - "12"y+"36" {} ##={} {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "24"y+"36"{} } } {} 2y 6 2 2y 2 2 6 2y + 6 2 4y 2 24 y + 36 size 12{ matrix { {} # left (2y - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} ##={} {} # left (2y right ) rSup { size 8{2} } - 2 left (6 right ) left (2y right )+6 rSup { size 8{2} } {} ## ={} {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "24"y+"36"{}} } {}

Did it work? If a formula is true, it should work for any y size 12{y} {} -value; let’s test each one with y = 5 size 12{y=5} {} . (Note that the second two methods got the same answer, so we only need to test that once.)

2y 6 2 = ? 4y 2 36 2 5 6 2 = ? 4y 2 36 10 6 2 = ? 100 36 4 2 = ? 64 size 12{ matrix { left (2y - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "36" {} ##left (2 cdot 5 - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "36" {} ## left ("10" - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # "100" - "36" {} ##4 rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # "64"{} } } {} 2y 6 2 = ? 4y 2 24 y + 36 2 5 6 2 = ? 4 5 2 24 5 + 36 10 6 2 = ? 100 120 + 36 4 2 = ? 16 size 12{ matrix { left (2y - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # 4y rSup { size 8{2} } - "24"y+"36" {} ##left (2 cdot 5 - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # 4 left (5 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } - "24" cdot 5+"36" {} ## left ("10" - 6 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # "100" - "120"+"36" {} ##4 rSup { size 8{2} } {} # { {}={}} cSup { size 8{?} } {} # "16"{} } } {}

We conclude that squaring each term individually does not work. The other two methods both give the same answer, which works.

The first method is the easiest, of course. And it looks good. 2y 2 size 12{ left (2y right ) rSup { size 8{2} } } {} is indeed 4y 2 size 12{4y rSup { size 8{2} } } {} . And 6 2 size 12{6 rSup { size 8{2} } } {} is indeed 36. But as you can see, it led us to a false answer —an algebraic generalization that did not hold up.

I just can’t stress this point enough. It sounds like a detail, but it causes errors all through Algebra II and beyond. When you’re adding or subtracting things, and then squaring them, you can’t just square them one at a time. Mathematically, x + a 2 x 2 + a 2 size 12{ left (x+a right ) rSup { size 8{2} }<>x rSup { size 8{2} } +a rSup { size 8{2} } } {} . You can confirm this with numbers all day. 7 + 3 2 = 100 size 12{ left (7+3 right ) rSup { size 8{2} } ="100"} {} , but 7 2 + 3 2 = 58 size 12{7 rSup { size 8{2} } +3 rSup { size 8{2} } ="58"} {} . They’re not the same.

So that leaves the other two methods. FOIL will never lead you astray. But the third approach, the formula, has three distinct advantages.

  1. The formula is faster than FOIL.
  2. Using these formulae is a specific case of the vital mathematical skill of using any formula—learning how to plug numbers and variables into some equation that you’ve been given, and therefore understanding the abstraction that formulae represent.
  3. Before this unit is done, we will be completing the square, which requires running that particular formula backward —which you cannot do with FOIL.

Questions & Answers

a perfect square v²+2v+_
Dearan Reply
kkk nice
Abdirahman Reply
algebra 2 Inequalities:If equation 2 = 0 it is an open set?
Kim Reply
or infinite solutions?
Kim
y=10×
Embra Reply
if |A| not equal to 0 and order of A is n prove that adj (adj A = |A|
Nancy Reply
rolling four fair dice and getting an even number an all four dice
ramon Reply
Kristine 2*2*2=8
Bridget Reply
Differences Between Laspeyres and Paasche Indices
Emedobi Reply
No. 7x -4y is simplified from 4x + (3y + 3x) -7y
Mary Reply
is it 3×y ?
Joan Reply
J, combine like terms 7x-4y
Bridget Reply
im not good at math so would this help me
Rachael Reply
how did I we'll learn this
Noor Reply
f(x)= 2|x+5| find f(-6)
Prince Reply
f(n)= 2n + 1
Samantha Reply
Need to simplify the expresin. 3/7 (x+y)-1/7 (x-1)=
Crystal Reply
. After 3 months on a diet, Lisa had lost 12% of her original weight. She lost 21 pounds. What was Lisa's original weight?
Chris Reply
preparation of nanomaterial
Victor Reply
Yes, Nanotechnology has a very fast field of applications and their is always something new to do with it...
Himanshu Reply
can nanotechnology change the direction of the face of the world
Prasenjit Reply
At high concentrations (>0.01 M), the relation between absorptivity coefficient and absorbance is no longer linear. This is due to the electrostatic interactions between the quantum dots in close proximity. If the concentration of the solution is high, another effect that is seen is the scattering of light from the large number of quantum dots. This assumption only works at low concentrations of the analyte. Presence of stray light.
Ali Reply
the Beer law works very well for dilute solutions but fails for very high concentrations. why?
bamidele Reply
how did you get the value of 2000N.What calculations are needed to arrive at it
Smarajit Reply
Got questions? Join the online conversation and get instant answers!
QuizOver.com Reply

Get the best Algebra and trigonometry course in your pocket!





Source:  OpenStax, Quadratic functions. OpenStax CNX. Mar 10, 2011 Download for free at http://cnx.org/content/col11284/1.2
Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google Inc.

Notification Switch

Would you like to follow the 'Quadratic functions' conversation and receive update notifications?

Ask