KNOWPIA
WELCOME TO KNOWPIA

In mathematics, an **nth root** of a number x is a number r (the root) which, when raised to the power of the positive integer n, yields x:

The integer n is called the *index* or *degree*, and the number x of which the root is taken is the *radicand.* A root of degree 2 is called a *square root* and a root of degree 3, a *cube root*. Roots of higher degree are referred by using ordinal numbers, as in *fourth root*, *twentieth root*, etc. The computation of an nth root is a **root extraction**.

For example, 3 is a square root of 9, since 3^{2} = 9, and −3 is also a square root of 9, since (−3)^{2} = 9.

The nth root of x is written as using the radical symbol or *radix* . The square root is usually written without the n as just . Taking the *n*th root of a number is the inverse operation of exponentiation,^{[1]} and can be written as a fractional exponent:

For a positive real number x, denotes the positive square root of x and denotes the positive real nth root. A negative real number −*x* has no real-valued square roots, but when x is treated as a complex number it has two imaginary square roots, and , where i is the imaginary unit.

In general, any non-zero complex number has n distinct complex-valued nth roots, equally distributed around a complex circle of constant absolute value. (The nth root of 0 is zero with multiplicity n, and this circle degenerates to a point.) Extracting the nth roots of a complex number x can thus be taken to be a multivalued function. By convention the principal value of this function, called the **principal root** and denoted , is taken to be the nth root with the greatest real part and in the special case when x is a negative real number, the one with a positive imaginary part. The principal root of a positive real number is thus also a positive real number. As a function, the principal root is continuous in the whole complex plane, except along the negative real axis.

An unresolved root, especially one using the radical symbol, is sometimes referred to as a **surd**^{[2]} or a **radical**.^{[3]} Any expression containing a radical, whether it is a square root, a cube root, or a higher root, is called a * radical expression*, and if it contains no transcendental functions or transcendental numbers it is called an

Roots are used for determining the radius of convergence of a power series with the root test. The nth roots of 1 are called roots of unity and play a fundamental role in various areas of mathematics, such as number theory, theory of equations, and Fourier transform.

An archaic term for the operation of taking *n*th roots is *radication*.^{[4]}^{[5]}

An *nth root* of a number *x*, where *n* is a positive integer, is any of the *n* real or complex numbers *r* whose *n*th power is *x*:

Every positive real number *x* has a single positive *n*th root, called the principal *n*th root, which is written . For *n* equal to 2 this is called the principal square root and the *n* is omitted. The *n*th root can also be represented using exponentiation as *x*^{1/n}.

For even values of *n*, positive numbers also have a negative *n*th root, while negative numbers do not have a real *n*th root. For odd values of *n*, every negative number *x* has a real negative *n*th root. For example, −2 has a real 5th root, but −2 does not have any real 6th roots.

Every non-zero number *x*, real or complex, has *n* different complex number *n*th roots. (In the case *x* is real, this count includes any real *n*th roots.) The only complex root of 0 is 0.

The *n*th roots of almost all numbers (all integers except the *n*th powers, and all rationals except the quotients of two *n*th powers) are irrational. For example,

All *n*th roots of rational numbers are algebraic numbers, and all *n*th roots of integers are algebraic integers.

The term "surd" traces back to Al-Khwarizmi (c. 825), who referred to rational and irrational numbers as *audible* and *inaudible*, respectively. This later led to the Arabic word أصم (*asamm*, meaning "deaf" or "dumb") for *irrational number* being translated into Latin as *surdus* (meaning "deaf" or "mute"). Gerard of Cremona (c. 1150), Fibonacci (1202), and then Robert Recorde (1551) all used the term to refer to *unresolved irrational roots*, that is, expressions of the form , in which and are integer numerals and the whole expression denotes an irrational number.^{[6]} Irrational numbers of the form where is rational, are called *pure quadratic surds*; irrational numbers of the form , where and are rational, are called *mixed quadratic surds*.^{[7]}

A **square root** of a number *x* is a number *r* which, when squared, becomes *x*:

Every positive real number has two square roots, one positive and one negative. For example, the two square roots of 25 are 5 and −5. The positive square root is also known as the **principal square root**, and is denoted with a radical sign:

Since the square of every real number is nonnegative, negative numbers do not have real square roots. However, for every negative real number there are two imaginary square roots. For example, the square roots of −25 are 5*i* and −5*i*, where *i* represents a number whose square is −1.

A **cube root** of a number *x* is a number *r* whose cube is *x*:

Every real number *x* has exactly one real cube root, written . For example,

Every real number has two additional complex cube roots.

Expressing the degree of an *n*th root in its exponent form, as in , makes it easier to manipulate powers and roots. If is a non-negative real number,

Every non-negative number has exactly one non-negative real *n*th root, and so the rules for operations with surds involving non-negative radicands and are straightforward within the real numbers:

Subtleties can occur when taking the *n*th roots of negative or complex numbers. For instance:

but, rather,

Since the rule strictly holds for non-negative real radicands only, its application leads to the inequality in the first step above.

A non-nested radical expression is said to be in **simplified form** if no factor of the radicand can be written as a power greater than or equal to the index; there are no fractions inside the radical sign; and there are no radicals in the denominator.^{[8]}

For example, to write the radical expression in simplified form, we can proceed as follows. First, look for a perfect square under the square root sign and remove it:

Next, there is a fraction under the radical sign, which we change as follows:

Finally, we remove the radical from the denominator as follows:

When there is a denominator involving surds it is always possible to find a factor to multiply both numerator and denominator by to simplify the expression.^{[9]}^{[10]} For instance using the factorization of the sum of two cubes:

Simplifying radical expressions involving nested radicals can be quite difficult. In particular, denesting is not always possible, and when possible, it may involve advanced Galois theory. Moreover, when complete denesting is impossible, there is no general canonical form such that the equality of two numbers can be tested by simply looking at their canonical expressions.

For example, it is not obvious that

The above can be derived through:

Let , with p and q coprime and positive integers. Then is rational if and only if both and are integers, which means that both p and q are *n*th powers of some integer.

The radical or root may be represented by the infinite series:

with . This expression can be derived from the binomial series.

The nth root of a number *A* can be computed with Newton's method, which starts with an initial guess *x*_{0} and then iterates using the recurrence relation

until the desired precision is reached. For computational efficiency, the recurrence relation is commonly rewritten

This allows to have only one exponentiation, and to compute once for all the first factor of each term.

For example, to find the fifth root of 34, we plug in *n* = 5, *A* = 34 and *x*_{0} = 2 (initial guess). The first 5 iterations are, approximately:

(All correct digits shown.)

The approximation *x*_{4} is accurate to 25 decimal places and *x*_{5} is good for 51.

Newton's method can be modified to produce various generalized continued fractions for the *n*th root. For example,

Building on the digit-by-digit calculation of a square root, it can be seen that the formula used there, , or , follows a pattern involving Pascal's triangle. For the *n*th root of a number is defined as the value of element in row of Pascal's Triangle such that , we can rewrite the expression as . For convenience, call the result of this expression . Using this more general expression, any positive principal root can be computed, digit-by-digit, as follows.

Write the original number in decimal form. The numbers are written similar to the long division algorithm, and, as in long division, the root will be written on the line above. Now separate the digits into groups of digits equating to the root being taken, starting from the decimal point and going both left and right. The decimal point of the root will be above the decimal point of the radicand. One digit of the root will appear above each group of digits of the original number.

Beginning with the left-most group of digits, do the following procedure for each group:

- Starting on the left, bring down the most significant (leftmost) group of digits not yet used (if all the digits have been used, write "0" the number of times required to make a group) and write them to the right of the remainder from the previous step (on the first step, there will be no remainder). In other words, multiply the remainder by and add the digits from the next group. This will be the
**current value**.*c* - Find
*p*and*x*, as follows:- Let be the
**part of the root found so far**, ignoring any decimal point. (For the first step, and ). - Determine the greatest digit such that .
- Place the digit as the next digit of the root, i.e., above the group of digits you just brought down. Thus the next
*p*will be the old*p*times 10 plus*x*.

- Let be the
- Subtract from to form a new remainder.
- If the remainder is zero and there are no more digits to bring down, then the algorithm has terminated. Otherwise go back to step 1 for another iteration.

**Find the square root of 152.2756.**

1 2. 3 4/ \/ 01 52.27 56 (Results) (Explanations) 01 x = 1 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·1^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·0^{1}·1^{1}≤ 1 < 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·2^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·0^{1}·2^{1}01y = 1 y = 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·1^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·0^{1}·1^{1}= 1 + 0 =100 52 x = 2 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·2^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·1^{1}·2^{1}≤ 52 < 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·3^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·1^{1}·3^{1}00 44y = 44 y = 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·2^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·1^{1}·2^{1}= 4 + 40 =4408 27 x = 3 10^{0}·1·12^{0}·3^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·12^{1}·3^{1}≤ 827 < 10^{0}·1·12^{0}·4^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·12^{1}·4^{1}07 29y = 729 y = 10^{0}·1·12^{0}·3^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·12^{1}·3^{1}= 9 + 720 =72998 56 x = 4 10^{0}·1·123^{0}·4^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·123^{1}·4^{1}≤ 9856 < 10^{0}·1·123^{0}·5^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·123^{1}·5^{1}98 56y = 9856 y = 10^{0}·1·123^{0}·4^{2}+ 10^{1}·2·123^{1}·4^{1}= 16 + 9840 =985600 00

Algorithm terminates: Answer is 12.34

**Find the cube root of 4192 truncated to the nearest thousandth.**

1 6. 1 2 43/ \/ 004 192.000 000 000 (Results) (Explanations) 004 x = 1 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·1^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·0^{1}·1^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·0^{2}·1^{1}≤ 4 < 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·2^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·0^{1}·2^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·0^{2}·2^{1}001y = 1 y = 10^{0}·1·0^{0}·1^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·0^{1}·1^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·0^{2}·1^{1}= 1 + 0 + 0 =1003 192 x = 6 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·6^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·1^{1}·6^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·1^{2}·6^{1}≤ 3192 < 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·7^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·1^{1}·7^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·1^{2}·7^{1}003 096y = 3096 y = 10^{0}·1·1^{0}·6^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·1^{1}·6^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·1^{2}·6^{1}= 216 + 1,080 + 1,800 =3,096096 000 x = 1 10^{0}·1·16^{0}·1^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·16^{1}·1^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·16^{2}·1^{1}≤ 96000 < 10^{0}·1·16^{0}·2^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·16^{1}·2^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·16^{2}·2^{1}077 281y = 77281 y = 10^{0}·1·16^{0}·1^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·16^{1}·1^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·16^{2}·1^{1}= 1 + 480 + 76,800 =77,281018 719 000 x = 2 10^{0}·1·161^{0}·2^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·161^{1}·2^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·161^{2}·2^{1}≤ 18719000 < 10^{0}·1·161^{0}·3^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·161^{1}·3^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·161^{2}·3^{1}015 571 928y = 15571928 y = 10^{0}·1·161^{0}·2^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·161^{1}·2^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·161^{2}·2^{1}= 8 + 19,320 + 15,552,600 =15,571,928003 147 072 000 x = 4 10^{0}·1·1612^{0}·4^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·1612^{1}·4^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·1612^{2}·4^{1}≤ 3147072000 < 10^{0}·1·1612^{0}·5^{3}+ 10^{1}·3·1612^{1}·5^{2}+ 10^{2}·3·1612^{2}·5^{1}

The desired precision is achieved. The cube root of 4192 is 16.124...

The principal *n*th root of a positive number can be computed using logarithms. Starting from the equation that defines *r* as an *n*th root of *x*, namely with *x* positive and therefore its principal root *r* also positive, one takes logarithms of both sides (any base of the logarithm will do) to obtain

The root *r* is recovered from this by taking the antilog:

(Note: That formula shows *b* raised to the power of the result of the division, not *b* multiplied by the result of the division.)

For the case in which *x* is negative and *n* is odd, there is one real root *r* which is also negative. This can be found by first multiplying both sides of the defining equation by −1 to obtain then proceeding as before to find |*r*|, and using *r* = −|*r*|.

The ancient Greek mathematicians knew how to use compass and straightedge to construct a length equal to the square root of a given length, when an auxiliary line of unit length is given. In 1837 Pierre Wantzel proved that an *n*th root of a given length cannot be constructed if *n* is not a power of 2.^{[11]}

Every complex number other than 0 has *n* different *n*th roots.

The two square roots of a complex number are always negatives of each other. For example, the square roots of −4 are 2*i* and −2*i*, and the square roots of *i* are

If we express a complex number in polar form, then the square root can be obtained by taking the square root of the radius and halving the angle:

A *principal* root of a complex number may be chosen in various ways, for example

which introduces a branch cut in the complex plane along the positive real axis with the condition 0 ≤ *θ* < 2π, or along the negative real axis with −π < *θ* ≤ π.

Using the first(last) branch cut the principal square root maps to the half plane with non-negative imaginary(real) part. The last branch cut is presupposed in mathematical software like Matlab or Scilab.

The number 1 has *n* different *n*th roots in the complex plane, namely

where

These roots are evenly spaced around the unit circle in the complex plane, at angles which are multiples of . For example, the square roots of unity are 1 and −1, and the fourth roots of unity are 1, , −1, and .

Every complex number has *n* different *n*th roots in the complex plane. These are

where *η* is a single *n*th root, and 1, *ω*, *ω*^{2}, ... *ω*^{n−1} are the *n*th roots of unity. For example, the four different fourth roots of 2 are

In polar form, a single *n*th root may be found by the formula

Here *r* is the magnitude (the modulus, also called the absolute value) of the number whose root is to be taken; if the number can be written as *a+bi* then . Also, is the angle formed as one pivots on the origin counterclockwise from the positive horizontal axis to a ray going from the origin to the number; it has the properties that and

Thus finding *n*th roots in the complex plane can be segmented into two steps. First, the magnitude of all the *n*th roots is the *n*th root of the magnitude of the original number. Second, the angle between the positive horizontal axis and a ray from the origin to one of the *n*th roots is , where is the angle defined in the same way for the number whose root is being taken. Furthermore, all *n* of the *n*th roots are at equally spaced angles from each other.

If *n* is even, a complex number's *n*th roots, of which there are an even number, come in additive inverse pairs, so that if a number *r*_{1} is one of the *n*th roots then *r*_{2} = –*r*_{1} is another. This is because raising the latter's coefficient –1 to the *n*th power for even *n* yields 1: that is, (–*r*_{1})^{n} = (–1)^{n} × *r*_{1}^{n} = *r*_{1}^{n}.

As with square roots, the formula above does not define a continuous function over the entire complex plane, but instead has a branch cut at points where *θ* / *n* is discontinuous.

It was once conjectured that all polynomial equations could be solved algebraically (that is, that all roots of a polynomial could be expressed in terms of a finite number of radicals and elementary operations). However, while this is true for third degree polynomials (cubics) and fourth degree polynomials (quartics), the Abel–Ruffini theorem (1824) shows that this is not true in general when the degree is 5 or greater. For example, the solutions of the equation

cannot be expressed in terms of radicals. (*cf.* quintic equation)

Assume that is rational. That is, it can be reduced to a fraction , where a and b are integers without a common factor.

This means that .

Since *x* is an integer, and must share a common factor if . This means that if , is not in simplest form. Thus *b* should equal 1.

Since and , .

This means that and thus, . This implies that is an integer. Since x is not a perfect nth power, this is impossible. Thus is irrational.

**^**"Lesson Explainer: nth Roots: Integers". Retrieved 22 July 2023.**^**Bansal, R.K. (2006).*New Approach to CBSE Mathematics IX*. Laxmi Publications. p. 25. ISBN 978-81-318-0013-3.**^**Silver, Howard A. (1986).*Algebra and trigonometry*. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-021270-2.**^**"Definition of RADICATION".*www.merriam-webster.com*.**^**"radication – Definition of radication in English by Oxford Dictionaries".*Oxford Dictionaries*. Archived from the original on April 3, 2018.**^**Miller, Jeff. "Earliest Known Uses of Some of the Words of Mathematics".*Mathematics Pages*. Retrieved 2008-11-30.**^**Hardy, G. H. (1921).*A Course of Pure Mathematics*(3rd ed.). Cambridge. §1.13 "Quadratic Surds" – §1.14, pp. 19–23.**^**McKeague, Charles P. (2011).*Elementary algebra*. Cengage Learning. p. 470. ISBN 978-0-8400-6421-9.**^**Caviness, B. F.; Fateman, R. J. "Simplification of Radical Expressions" (PDF).*Proceedings of the 1976 ACM Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation*. p. 329.**^**Richard, Zippel (1985). "Simplification of Expressions Involving Radicals".*Journal of Symbolic Computation*.**1**(189–210). doi:10.1016/S0747-7171(85)80014-6.**^**Wantzel, M. L. (1837). "Recherches sur les moyens de reconnaître si un Problème de Géométrie peut se résoudre avec la règle et le compas".*Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées*.**1**(2): 366–372.

Look up **surd** in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Look up **radical** in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.