Radicals and Rational Exponents: Chapter Test
20 multiple-choice questions and 10 free-response questions, drawn from across the chapter and mixed together.
Multiple choice
Answer in any order and change your mind as often as you like. When you submit, your answers lock and every question shows its worked solution.
Free response
10 questions in parts, 77 points in total. Work them out on paper. There are no hints here: reveal each question's answer, worked solution, and rubric when you are ready to mark that one.
Reset the free-response section?
This re-seals every answer you have revealed and clears your flags.
-
1. Two routes to one exponent, and the arithmetic each one costs . 9 points. Question 1 of 10.
This question is about evaluating rational exponents by taking the root first and the power second, and about why that order never changes the answer.
- Part A.
Evaluate .
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part B.
Evaluate .
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part C.
The alternate route for part A computes instead of . Compute , and explain why this route reaches the same value as part A despite the extra arithmetic.
Explain why it works A sentence or two. Reasons, not steps. 3 points
The answer
Part A
.
Part B
.
Part C
, and since . Both routes agree because a positive base has exactly one positive cube root, so root-then-power and power-then-root always land on the same number; taking the root first only keeps the numbers small.
Worked solution
Part A
Take the cube root first, since the denominator of the exponent names the root, then square it.
Part B
A negative exponent means take the reciprocal first; only then apply the rational exponent.
Part C
Squaring first gives , and since , the cube root of that is , matching part A.
The two routes must agree because is positive: a positive number has exactly one positive cube root, so and are two names for the same number, one of them just easier to compute by hand.
In one line
and . Since , the two routes for part A agree, because a positive base has exactly one positive cube root; taking the root first only keeps the arithmetic small, it never changes the result.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Takes the cube root before applying the outer power. . Worth 2 points.
Reports a single whole-number result with no remaining radical. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Reciprocates the base to clear the negative exponent before applying the power. . Worth 2 points.
Reports a positive result, since a negative exponent flips a value over rather than flipping its sign. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 3 points
Grounds the agreement between the two routes in a positive base having exactly one positive -th root, not in coincidence. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Computes correctly and confirms . . Worth 1 point.
-
-
2. One radicand that needs a restriction, and one that never does . 9 points. Question 2 of 10.
Both parts below ask for simplest radical form. Watch what each radicand's exponent on forces you to say about the domain.
- Part A.
Put in simplest radical form, given that .
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part B.
Put in simplest radical form, where may be any real number and .
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part C.
Part A required before you could even write , while part B allowed to be any real number. Explain what feature of each radicand causes that difference.
Explain why it works A sentence or two. Reasons, not steps. 3 points
The answer
Part A
.
Part B
.
Part C
Part A's radicand carries , an ODD power; since the index is even, an odd power of a possibly negative could be negative, so nonnegativity had to be imposed. Part B's radicand carries , an EVEN power, automatically nonnegative for every real , so no restriction was needed.
Worked solution
Part A
Split off the largest perfect square factor: . Since , with no bars needed.
Part B
Split off the perfect square factor . Since the exponent emerging from the root is , an even number, no bars are needed regardless of the sign of .
Part C
The index in both cases is (even), which forces the radicand to be nonnegative. In part A, the radicand's is an odd power of , so it takes the sign of ; a negative would make negative, so had to be given. In part B, the radicand's is an even power, which is for every real automatically, so the radicand never needs restricted (only was needed).
In one line
for , and for any real (with ). Part A needed the restriction because is an odd power that could be negative; part B did not, because is always nonnegative.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Extracts the perfect square factor , leaving inside the radical. . Worth 2 points.
Uses the given to write without bars. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Extracts the perfect square factor , leaving inside the radical. . Worth 2 points.
Reports with no absolute value bars, since the exponent emerging from the root is even. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 3 points
Identifies the odd exponent on in part A versus the even exponent in part B as the deciding feature. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Ties the observation back to the even index needing a nonnegative radicand. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
3. A shipping bill that reads like a radical equation . 7 points. Question 3 of 10.
A shipping company charges dollars to ship a package weighing pounds.
- Part A.
A customer is billed $24. Isolate the radical, raise both sides to the matching power, and find .
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part B.
A different customer says they were billed $12 using the same pricing rule. Determine whether any weight could produce that bill, and justify your answer without doing any unnecessary algebra.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 3 points
The answer
Part A
pounds.
Part B
No such weight exists: solving would require , and a principal square root can never equal a negative number, for any .
Worked solution
Part A
Isolate the radical, then square both sides.
Check: , , and , matching the bill.
Part B
Isolate the radical the same way as in part A. The left side is a principal square root, which is never negative, while the right side is . No value of can make a nonnegative quantity equal a negative one, so the equation has no solution, and no further algebra (squaring, solving) is needed to see it.
In one line
The $24 bill corresponds to pounds. A $12 bill is impossible: isolating the radical would require , and a principal square root is never negative, so no weight produces that bill.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Isolates the radical before squaring. . Worth 1 point.
Squares and solves the resulting linear equation correctly. . Worth 2 points.
Reports the solved weight with the unit pounds. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Isolates the radical to see that it would need to equal . . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
States plainly that a principal square root is never negative, so no further algebra is needed. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
4. The same two radicals, multiplied two different ways . 9 points. Question 4 of 10.
Both parts multiply expressions built from and . Only one of the two products is a true conjugate pair.
- Part A.
Expand .
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part B.
Expand .
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part C.
Explain why part B's product came out rational while part A's did not, referring to the coefficients in each expression.
Explain why it works A sentence or two. Reasons, not steps. 3 points
The answer
Part A
.
Part B
.
Part C
In part B the two binomials are true conjugates, both carry , so the cross terms and are exact opposites and cancel. In part A the second factor uses , not , so the cross terms are unequal in size and only partly cancel, leaving behind.
Worked solution
Part A
Expand every term against every term, then use and .
Part B
This is a true conjugate pair: the matching term is in both factors, so the cross terms are exact opposites and cancel.
Part C
A conjugate pair needs the SAME coefficient on the matching term in both factors, so that the two cross terms are exact opposites. In part B both factors carry , so the cross terms cancel completely; in part A the second factor carries instead of , so they do not.
In one line
, while the true conjugate pair . Only matching coefficients on the shared term make the cross terms exact opposites, which is what cancels the radical.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Expands all four products and resolves each radical-times-radical term. . Worth 2 points.
Collects the two cross terms into a single radical term rather than leaving them separate. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Recognizes the conjugate pattern and applies the difference of squares directly. . Worth 1 point.
Squares both terms in the conjugate pair, including the coefficient on the radical term. . Worth 1 point.
Reports the result as a single rational number, with no radical remaining. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 3 points
Identifies that a true conjugate pair needs identical coefficients on the matching term for the cross terms to be exact opposites. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Cites the specific cross terms from each part to support the explanation. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
5. Why an even power can never reach a negative target . 6 points. Question 5 of 10.
This question builds, from scratch, the argument behind the chapter's central restriction: why an even-indexed root of a negative number is never real.
- Part A.
Let be an even positive integer and let be any real number. Show that .
Complete the derivation Each line should follow from the one above it. Say what lets you take each step. 3 points
- Part B.
Use part A to prove that if and is even, no real number satisfies .
Carry your own answer forward Use whatever form you reached in part A, even if it was not exactly ; the credit here is for combining a nonnegative-square fact with to reach a contradiction.
Complete the derivation Each line should follow from the one above it. Say what lets you take each step. 3 points
The answer
Part A
For even , , and the square of any real number is . So for every real whenever is even.
Part B
If , no real satisfies : part A shows for every real when is even, but , so would force a nonnegative number to equal a negative one, which is impossible.
Worked solution
Part A
Since is even, write for a positive integer . The square of any real number is nonnegative, regardless of the sign of , so .
Part B
Suppose, for contradiction, that some real satisfies with even and . By part A, , so this would force too, contradicting . So no such exists.
This is exactly why names no real number when and is even.
In one line
For even , write ; then for every real . Since can never equal a nonnegative number, no real satisfies . This is exactly why names no real number when and is even.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Writes to use the evenness of . . Worth 1 point.
Concludes is a square of a real number, hence nonnegative. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Part B 3 points
Combines part A's with to reach a contradiction. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
States the conclusion clearly, connecting it back to why is undefined for and even . . Worth 1 point.
-
-
6. One ramp slope, rationalized two ways . 6 points. Question 6 of 10.
A ramp's exact slope, in feet of rise per foot of run, is . A contractor needs it written with a whole-number denominator.
- Part A.
Rationalize the denominator of , giving the answer in lowest terms.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part B.
A coworker instead multiplies top and bottom by alone, since . Show that this shortcut reaches the same answer, and explain why it is legitimate even though is not the original denominator.
Carry your own answer forward Compare the shortcut's result with whatever value you found in part A; use that result consistently in your comparison.
Compare the two methods Say what each one costs you, and when you would reach for it. 3 points
The answer
Part A
.
Part B
Multiplying by gives , the same result, since , not , is the factor that completes the square once is simplified to .
Worked solution
Part A
Multiply top and bottom by , then simplify.
Part B
Simplifying first, . It is legitimate because once is written as , the factor , not , is what genuinely completes the square in the denominator; multiplying by either form of clears the radical.
In one line
. Multiplying instead by , after first simplifying , reaches the identical fraction, because is the factor that actually completes the square once the radical itself is simplified.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Multiplies top and bottom by (or an equivalent completing factor). . Worth 2 points.
Reduces the resulting fraction to lowest terms. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Shows the shortcut reaches the identical fraction found in part A. . Worth 2 points.
Explains why multiplying by the simplified radical still legitimately rationalizes the denominator. . Worth 1 point. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
7. A shortcut that squares a difference the wrong way . 7 points. Question 7 of 10.
This question is about , solved correctly and then compared with a classmate's flawed shortcut.
- Part A.
Solve , isolating one radical at a time and raising to the matching power at each step.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 4 points
- Part B.
A classmate instead squares both sides directly, writing , and concludes . Identify the specific algebra error, and explain why could never have been a genuine solution regardless of the error.
Find and correct the error Say which line first goes wrong, why it is wrong, and then do it correctly. 3 points
The answer
Part A
no real solution (the quadratic has a negative discriminant).
Part B
The student squared term by term, using , which is false; squaring a difference must expand the cross term. Also fails the domain, since makes not even real.
Worked solution
Part A
Isolate one radical, square, isolate the surviving radical, and square again.
The discriminant is , which is negative, so there is no real candidate at all.
Part B
The classmate's step treats as , which is the false rule ; the correct expansion keeps a cross term.
Independent of that error, gives , so is not even a real number there, meaning could never have satisfied the original equation.
In one line
has no real solution: isolating and squaring twice leads to , whose discriminant is negative. A classmate's shortcut of squaring term by term, , is not a legal expansion of , and its candidate also falls outside the domain.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 4 points
Isolates a single radical before each squaring step. . Worth 1 point.
Reaches and computes its discriminant correctly. . Worth 2 points.
Recognizes that a negative discriminant means the equation has no real solution at all. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Names the term-by-term squaring error specifically, contrasting it with the correct expansion of . . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Notes that falls outside the domain independent of the squaring error. . Worth 1 point.
-
-
8. A formula that stops being real before the algebra says so . 9 points. Question 8 of 10.
A physics model gives the speed (in meters per second) of a wave on a string as , where is a tension parameter.
- Part A.
For what values of does represent a real speed?
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part B.
Evaluate at , in simplest radical form.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part C.
Suppose someone evaluates at without first checking the domain from part A. Explain what goes wrong, referencing the parity of the index.
Explain why it works A sentence or two. Reasons, not steps. 3 points
The answer
Part A
.
Part B
m/s.
Part C
At the radicand is , which is negative. Since the index is even, a negative radicand names no real number, so is undefined there, exactly why part A restricted to .
Worked solution
Part A
An even-indexed root needs a nonnegative radicand.
Part B
Substitute and extract the perfect square factor from the radicand.
Part C
Because is defined by a square root, an even-indexed root, a negative radicand means the expression names no real number: is simply undefined at . This is exactly the boundary that part A's domain restriction, , was set up to exclude.
In one line
The formula is real for ; at , m/s. At the radicand is , so the even-indexed root gives no real number there, which is exactly the boundary part A found.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Sets up the inequality . . Worth 1 point.
Solves the domain inequality and reports the resulting interval. . Worth 2 points.
Part B 3 points
Substitutes the given parameter and simplifies the radicand correctly. . Worth 1 point.
Extracts the greatest perfect-square factor, simplifies fully, and reports the result with the correct units. . Worth 2 points.
Part C 3 points
Computes the radicand at and identifies it as negative. . Worth 1 point. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Connects the even index to why a negative radicand fails to be real, tying it back to part A's restriction. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
-
-
9. Why a cube root needs more than a sign flip . 6 points. Question 9 of 10.
A student wants to rationalize and reaches for the ordinary conjugate, multiplying by .
- Part A.
Compute , and state whether the denominator is now free of radicals.
Write the expression An equation or an expression is enough here. Show how you built it. 3 points
- Part B.
Explain, in general terms using for an irrational cube root (where is rational but not a perfect cube) and for a rational number, why a two-term sign flip can never fully clear such a cube root, while it always clears a square root.
Justify your claim State the claim, then give the reason it has to be true. 3 points
The answer
Part A
, which still contains a radical, so the denominator is not yet rational.
Part B
A square root's square, , is rational, so needs only one cancellation. A cube root's square, , is ALSO irrational, so leaves that term behind; only is rational.
Worked solution
Part A
Expand as a difference of squares.
Since is not a perfect cube, is irrational, so the denominator is still not rational.
Part B
For a square root , the relation is rational, so one sign flip already clears it. For a cube root , the square is ALSO irrational (only is rational), so a sign flip leaves that term behind.
A sign flip only ever cancels an ODD power of the new object; a cube root has two irrational powers standing in the way, not one.
In one line
, still irrational, so the ordinary conjugate fails. In general, a square root's square is rational, but a cube root's square is still irrational, so a two-term sign flip leaves that squared term behind; only the cube itself is rational, which is why a three-term multiplier is needed.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Expands the product using the difference-of-squares pattern. . Worth 2 points.
Determines whether a radical remains and states whether the resulting denominator is rational. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Identifies that an irrational cube root's square is also irrational, unlike a square root's square. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
States the general pattern clearly in terms of and . . Worth 1 point.
-
-
10. Welding two pipe lengths, and the rule that would have gone wrong . 9 points. Question 10 of 10.
A fabricator is joining two lengths of pipe cut from the same stock: side lengths and meters for one frame, and widths and meters for another.
- Part A.
The frame's area is the product of its two side lengths, . Evaluate it.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part B.
The two widths, and meters, need to be welded end to end. Find the total length in simplest form.
Solve and show your work Write each step out, and end with the value and its units. 3 points
- Part C.
Part A's product rule needs and to guarantee it lands on the correct nonnegative root. Explain why could NOT be evaluated by the same product-rule step used in part A, and state what it equals instead.
Carry your own answer forward Compare your complex-number result with whatever value you found in part A; use your part A result consistently in the comparison.
Compare the two methods Say what each one costs you, and when you would reach for it. 3 points
The answer
Part A
m.
Part B
meters.
Part C
Both radicands are negative, so the product rule's hypothesis fails. Converting to -form first, (m in the analogous units), the NEGATIVE of part A's value, not .
Worked solution
Part A
Both radicands are nonnegative, so the product rule applies directly.
Part B
Simplify each radical to expose a shared unit, then add the like radicals.
Part C
The product rule requires and ; here both radicands are negative, so the hypothesis fails and the rule cannot be applied directly. Converting each factor to -form first,
which is the negative of part A's answer, not the that blindly applying the product rule to would give.
In one line
m and meters. But cannot use the same product-rule step, since both radicands are negative; converting to -form first gives , the negative of part A's answer.
Rubric
Mark your own paper against this. Give yourself the points for each element you actually wrote down, not the ones you meant to.
Part A 3 points
Applies the product rule to combine the two radicands into a single radical. . Worth 2 points.
Simplifies the radical completely and reports the result with the correct units. . Worth 1 point.
Part B 3 points
Simplifies each radical to extract its perfect square factor. . Worth 2 points.
Recognizes the two radicals share the radicand and combines them into a single term. . Worth 1 point.
Part C 3 points
Identifies that both radicands are negative, so the product rule's hypothesis fails. . Worth 2 points. needs an explanation, not just an answer
Converts both radicals to -form, accounts for the product of the imaginary units, and simplifies completely. . Worth 1 point.
-