49g+ Cube roots


I just recently purchased a 49g+, and am trying to graph a cube root function. I am only able to generate the portion of the graph with y values greater than 0. Is there a way to get the other half of the graph as well?


1. Go to the "plot window" screen (press and hold left-shift and press F2).

2. Check the value for "Indep Low". I think it defaults to zero. If you change it to a number less then zero then the 49g+ will graph from that number to whatever you have the "Indep High" value set to.


I suspect you've run into the "what is the cube root of a negative number" problem.

For positive numbers, the cube root (one of them) is a positive number, too. These are the positive (i.e. y>0) values that you can plot now.

For negative numbers, in most cases (except for numbers which are a perfect cube of some other negative number, such as -8 = -2^3) the cube root will be a complex number: cube root of -4 = 0.794 + 1.37i (as my '42S just gave me). I don't know for sure (I don't have one), but I'll bet that the 49g+ doesn't know what to do when it tries to plot that complex number - so it just gives up.


Not exactly: Any number has three complex roots (one of them is real) Try how -1,58740105197 is a cubic root of -4...

The next 65 bytes program is xROOTy command for the 42s:

+ RCL "A"

Sure it is not a good program from the programmer point of view, but it does the work... Please: post if you don't get the expected results to correct the prg


Hi Raul!

I want to try this in a not 42s. Could you tell me what the "MOD" command is so that I might find an equivalent on a 15 or 32 or some other?

Best regards,

Bill Platt

plattdesign dot net


Hi Bill:

Bill posted:
"Could you tell me what the "MOD" command is so that I might find an equivalent on a 15 or 32 or some other?"

You can use this expression to evaluate the MOD command,
coded in your favorite programming language:

     X MOD Y  =  X - Y*INT(X/Y)

so, for instance:

     8 MOD 3 = 8 - 3*INT(8/3) = 8 - 3*INT(2.666+) = 8-3*2 = 2

Best regards from V.





You are, of course, correct:

"Any number has three complex roots (one of them is real)"

(Although this should actually be "Any number has three complex [CUBE] roots (one of them is real)")

I realized this about an hour after I posted. I fixated on the complex root which the 42S gave me - which I obtained by taking -4 to the 1/3 power. When I use the "x-th root of y" button to take the cube root on my 32SII, it gives me the -1.587 answer.

Thus, Kellie's problem may or may not relate to how she is taking the cube root. Which of these modes does the 49g+ use?


(Although this should actually be "Any number has three complex [CUBE] roots (one of them is real)")
You are, of course, correct ;-)

About Kellie's problem... in my 48GX I get the correct graphic when I use cubic root, but only what Kellie says if I use x^(1/3)

Raul L


Recently some of us had a thread on this matter (near the end of January), and we concluded that the 32 SII function "x root of y" answers with the real root (for instance: -2 as the cubic root of -8), while the "x to the 1/3 power" approach (as in the HP42S) answers with the so-called "primary" root, which is the one in the first quadrant of the complex plane.


[quote/ (Although this should actually be "Any number has three complex [CUBE] roots (one of them is real)")[/quote]

Actually, that's not precise either, Dave. Any _real_ number will have one real cube root. But cube roots of complex numbers (a+bi, where a<>0 and b<>0) are unlikely to be real.

Forgive me if you already know this, but there's a picture that helps remember this. Think of the Mercedes Benz symbol -- the points are at 120-degree intervals. Same with all 3 cube roots of a number.




I think you're wrong. There really are three cube roots for all numbers - even real ones.

For sure, for negative, real numbers, (such as -2, -3, -4, etc.), there are the regular cube root (i.e. the same cube root as for the equivalent positive number, but with a minus sign in front) as well as those roots rotated by +/-120 degrees in the complex plane. (The Mercedes symbol has to be rotated by -90 degrees for positive numbers, and +90 degrees for negative numbers, where + implies counterclockwise rotation. The "simple" (non-imaginary) root lies along the +x axis for positive numbers and along the -x axis for negative numbers.)

For example: the cube root of +4 returned by the 42S is 1.5874 (using the y^x button, with y=4 and x=1/3), i.e. along the +x (positive real numbers) axis. However, the complex roots -0.794-1.37i and -0.794+1.37i also give +4 when cubed (neglecting round-off, of course).

Conversely, the cube root of -4 determined by the same set of button pushings gives +0.794+1.37i with the 42S. But, -1.5874^3 = -4, as does (0.794-1.37i)^3 . (Again, to within round-off)

Similar results hold for any positive or negative (real; i.e. non-imaginary) number. Thus, Raul had it right (with my minor correction).

The extension to any power is that there are n values for the n-th root, arranged as a Mercedes star with n points equally spaced in angle in the complex plane, with one point aligned with the +x (real) axis for positive numbers, and one point aligned with the -x (also real) axis for negative numbers.

I leave complex values for our mathematician friends, with the expectation that one of the star points of the root system will be either aligned or anti-aligned with the original complex number.

PS send me an e-mail direct


Thanks for your reply, Dave.

Here's the original wording:

(Although this should actually be "Any number has three complex [CUBE] roots (one of them is real)")

It has two parts. First "any number has 3 complex cube roots," with which I have no problem at all. The second part is "(one of them is real)" is the one I objected to. It should have been "one of them _may be_ real". Or change the first part to further qualify the second: "Any _real_ number has 3 complex cube roots (one of them is real)."

Sorry I didn't make my meaning clear.



You might want to turn the Complex mode off in the CAS MODES menu.


Thanks to everyone that responded to my question, I just recently switched to an HP calculator, and am still getting used to everything, all of the help was greatly appreciated!

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  HP prime: logs and roots Alberto Candel 5 1,351 11-20-2013, 12:31 PM
Last Post: Manolo Sobrino
  HP-71B - thanks to Marcus von Cube for MATH ROM article Michael Lopez 2 964 03-03-2013, 07:19 AM
Last Post: Paul Berger (Canada)
  Cube root on standard calculator Thomas Klemm 22 4,441 11-09-2012, 06:11 AM
Last Post: Pierre
  HP-51G: Back to the honorable roots! Martin Paech 24 4,019 04-08-2012, 01:39 AM
Last Post: db (martinez, ca.)
  35s - find roots of 3rd and higher order equations Chris C 11 2,322 02-25-2012, 02:55 PM
Last Post: Thomas Klemm
  Polynomial roots again ... fhub 13 2,498 12-28-2011, 12:49 PM
Last Post: fhub
  Any expert for polynomial roots here? fhub 20 3,339 11-10-2011, 01:52 PM
Last Post: Peter Murphy (Livermore)
  Archaeology attack: Rubik's Cube on the 41 Ángel Martin 17 2,768 05-26-2010, 03:03 AM
Last Post: Paul Dale
  Is there something going on out there? (or Getting Back to My Roots...) Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) 22 3,811 04-26-2010, 09:51 PM
Last Post: Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)
  Computing Square Roots Thomas Klemm 11 2,104 03-30-2009, 03:26 PM
Last Post: Thomas Klemm

Forum Jump: