The rule there found for squaring a number consisting of parts was:
Square each part, and multiply all that come after by twice that part,
the sum of all the results so obtained will be the square of the whole
number. In the expression above obtained, instead of multiplying 2_a_
by _each_ of the succeeding parts, _b_, _c_, and _d_, and adding the
results, we multiplied 2_a_ by the _sum of all_ the succeeding parts,
which (52) is the same thing; and as the parts, however disposed,
make up the number, we may reverse their order, putting the last
first, &c.; and the rule for squaring will be: Square each part, and
multiply all that come before by twice that part. Hence a reverse rule
for extracting the square root presents itself with more than usual
simplicity. It is: To extract the square root of a number N, choose
a number A, and see if N will bear the subtraction of the square of
A; if so, take the remainder, choose a second number B, and see if
the remainder will bear the subtraction of the square of B, and twice
B multiplied by the preceding part A: if it will, there is a second
remainder. Choose a third number C, and see if the second remainder
will bear the subtraction of the square of C, and twice C multiplied by
A + B: go on in this way either until there is no remainder, or else
until the remainder will not bear the subtraction arising from any new
part, even though that part were the least number, which is 1. In the
first case, the square root is the sum of A, B, C, &c.; in the second,
there is no square root.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account