Donate SIGN UP

maths- fractions

Avatar Image
masonbm | 15:50 Thu 17th Nov 2005 | Science
1 Answers
<XMP>When I was at school, we learned</XMP><XMP>that a quick way of finding a fraction</XMP><XMP>between the value of two other </XMP><XMP>fractions</XMP><XMP>was simply to add together the</XMP><XMP>numerators of the two other fractions,</XMP><XMP>do the same for the two denominators</XMP><XMP>and put one figure over the other</XMP><XMP>e.g between 1/2 and 1/3 you have 2/5.</XMP><XMP>Does anyone know if this always works</XMP><XMP>- and why?</XMP>
Gravatar

Answers

Only 1 answerrss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by masonbm. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

It is true, as long as the fractions are positive, but it gets a bit algebraic and tricky to set out clearly!


The fractions could be a/b and c/d, with a/b being less than c/d. A fraction formed in the way you've said is (a+c)/(b+d).


We need to show that (a+c)/(b+d) is larger than a/b i.e.


(a+c)/(b+d) > a/b


Assuming b and (b+d) are positive, we can cross multiply to get.


b(a+c)>a(b+d), or ba + bc > ab + ad


the ba and ab cancel, to give


bc > ad


dividing (as long as d and b are positive), this gives


c/d>a/b, which is true from our first assumption.


The same logic can be used to show that the new fraction is less than c/d.


Hope this helps!

Only 1 answerrss feed

Do you know the answer?

maths- fractions

Answer Question >>