An exponent records repeated multiplication: bn means the base b multiplied by itself n times. Five laws follow immediately from that reading, and every later extension of the idea, to zero, negative, fractional and even irrational exponents, is defined precisely so that those same five laws keep working.
Quick Reference
| Rule | Formula | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Product Rule | ||
| Quotient Rule | , | |
| Power of a Power | ||
| Power of a Product | ||
| Power of a Quotient | , | |
| Zero Exponent | , | |
| Negative Exponent | , | |
| th Root | ||
| Rational Exponent | ||
| Even Root of a Square |
Positive Integer Exponents and the Laws of Exponents
When we multiply a real number b by itself n times, we write the result in exponential form as bn. That is:
In the expression bn, b is called the base and n is called the exponent (or power).
It immediately follows from this definition that the basic laws of exponents (also known as exponent rules) apply. For any real numbers b and c, and positive integers m and n:
- Product Rule: bn · bm = bn+m
- Quotient Rule: bn / bm = bn-m (where b ≠ 0)
- Power of a Power Rule:
- Power of a Product Rule: (bc)n = bn cn
- Power of a Quotient Rule: (b/c)n = bn /cn (where c ≠ 0)
In the following sections, we explore how to give meaning to br when the exponent r is not a positive integer. Mathematical definitions are logically designed so that these five fundamental laws of exponents remain true for all types of numbers.
Zero Exponent Rule (r = 0)
The zero exponent rule states that any non-zero base raised to the power of zero is equal to 1. If , we define:
Why b0 = 1 (b ≠ 0) is the only definition consistent with the Product Rule
We want the Product Rule to hold true when . Taking any positive integer and setting , we get:
Dividing both sides by (which is valid since ):
This is the only value of consistent with the fundamental exponent rules. There is no choice involved — the math forces it!
For a detailed explanation of why is often considered undefined, see the FAQ section below.
Fractional Exponents: nth Roots (r = 1/n)
The fractional exponent rule connects exponents to radicals. If r = 1/n (where n is a positive integer), then is called the th root of . It is the real number such that . This is also denoted using the radical symbol :
(Note: The square root is simply written as .)
Deriving the Fractional Exponent Rule
We want the Power Rule to hold with and :
So, must be a number that, when raised to the th power, yields . That is the exact mathematical definition of the th root of .
Whether such a real number u exists, and how many there are, depends on whether the index n is odd or even.
Odd vs. Even Index
- Case 1: n is a positive odd integer. There is exactly one real nth root for each real number b.
- Case 2: is a positive even integer. Because for all real and even (for example, ), the equation has no real solution when . For , the identity gives two real th roots: and . By convention, the symbol or always denotes the positive (principal) th root.
Sign of
To summarize the signs of fractional exponents:
- is positive if .
- is negative if and is odd.
- is imaginary (not a real number) if and is even. (See Section: Principal Square Root of Negative Numbers)
Properties of th Roots
The properties of th roots are not a separate set of rules — they are simply the five laws of exponents applied with . The table below makes the correspondence explicit.
| Property of nth Roots | Corresponding Exponent Law |
|---|---|
| Power of a Product Rule with | |
| Power of a Quotient Rule with | |
| Power of a Power Rule with | |
| ( odd) | Power Rule with (unique root) |
| ( even) | Power Rule with (positive root) |
(We assume throughout that all the roots involved exist as real numbers. Let and be real numbers, and and be positive integers.)
Proof of (or )
Let and , meaning and . Using the Power of a Product Rule:
Therefore, is an th root of , which proves .
Proof of (or )
Let and , meaning and . Using the Power of a Quotient Rule:
Therefore, is an th root of , proving .
Proof of (or )
Let . By definition, , and . Using the Power Rule :
Therefore, is an th root of , proving .
Why when is odd
We verify that is an th root of : . When is odd, this root is unique, so no absolute value is needed.
Why when is even
When is even, both and satisfy . Since the symbol strictly denotes the non-negative root, we must use the absolute value . For example, , not .
Important Note: When is even and both and , then and exist as real numbers (since and ), but and individually do not. In real arithmetic, you cannot split the root using the Product and Quotient formulas in this specific case.
Rational Exponent Rule (r = m/n)
The rational exponent rule evaluates fractional powers where the numerator is greater than 1. If r = m/n (where m and n are positive integers and the fraction is simplified to its lowest terms, e.g., reducing 6/4 to 3/2), then is defined as the th root of the th power of :
It can also be computed identically as the mth power of the nth root:
(If is even, we require to remain in the real number system).
Why is the right definition
We want the Product Rule to hold for . Since is already established, we write as a sum of copies of :
This proves that is the only definition consistent with the Product Rule.
Example calculation:
Irrational Exponents
What happens when the exponent is an irrational number, like or ?
If is an irrational exponent and , then is defined by approximating with a sequence of rational numbers. Since irrational numbers can be approximated to any desired accuracy by terminating decimals (which are fractions), we can use limits.
For example, to compute :
Since , we can evaluate rational approximations:
The exact value of is the mathematical limit of this sequence.
(Note: When is irrational and , the expression is not a real number and enters the realm of complex analysis. Alternatively, advanced mathematics often bypasses limits by defining exponents using the natural logarithm: .)
Negative Exponent Rule
The negative exponent rule states that a negative exponent dictates the reciprocal of the base raised to the positive exponent. If , we define to be whenever is defined.
For example:
Why is the only definition consistent with the Product Rule
We want the Product Rule to hold with :
Dividing both sides by (valid since ):
Exercises
Evaluate each of the following.
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Answer
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Solution
Use the definition given at the start of this section: means multiplied by itself times.
(a) . Multiply five 's together, one step at a time:
So . Note that is not . The exponent counts how many factors there are, it is not itself a factor.
(b) . The parentheses tell us the base is , so we multiply four copies of :
So , a positive number. The minus signs cancel in pairs, and with four factors there are two such pairs.
(c) . Now there are only three copies:
So , a negative number. One minus sign is left over without a partner.
The pattern behind (b) and (c) is worth remembering: a negative base raised to an even power gives a positive result, and to an odd power gives a negative result. This section uses that fact when it discusses odd and even indices.
(d) . By the Zero Exponent Rule, any non-zero base raised to the power is . Since ,
(e) . By the Power of a Quotient Rule, , so the exponent applies to the top and the bottom separately:
A common slip is to cube only the numerator and write . The whole fraction is the base, so the whole fraction gets cubed.
Simplify, writing each answer as a single power where possible.
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Answer
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Solution
Each part uses exactly one of the five laws. The skill is identifying which.
(a) . Two powers of the same base are being multiplied, so this is the Product Rule, . The exponents are added:
Why adding is right: is four 's and is seven 's, so together there are eleven 's multiplied.
(b) . Powers of the same base are being divided, so this is the Quotient Rule, (requiring ). The exponents are subtracted:
(c) . A power is being raised to another power, so this is the Power of a Power Rule, . The exponents are multiplied:
Parts (a) and (c) are the pair most often confused. Multiplying two powers adds exponents; raising a power to a power multiplies them. The bracket is the clue: no bracket means a product, a bracket means a power of a power.
(d) . The base is the product , so this is the Power of a Product Rule, . The exponent goes onto each factor:
Do not leave the alone. Writing would be wrong, since that is a different expression — test it with , where but .
(e) . The base is a quotient, so this is the Power of a Quotient Rule:
Evaluate each root, or state that it is not a real number.
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Answer
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) not a real number
Solution
By the definition in this section, means . So in each part we hunt for a number that gives the value under the root when raised to the appropriate power, and then we check the sign rules.
(a) . We need with . Trying small numbers: , too small; , exactly right. So
(b) . We need with . Since , the answer is . Note that as well, so there are two real fourth roots here. The index is even, and this section states that in that case the symbol always denotes the positive (principal) root. So
not and not "".
(c) . We need with . An odd power keeps the sign of its base, so must be negative. Trying :
So . This is allowed because the index is odd, and the section says every real number has exactly one real th root when is odd.
(d) . The missing index is understood to be . We need , and . The index is even, so we take the positive root:
(e) . We need with . But raising any real number to an even power gives a result that is zero or positive — a negative base has its minus signs cancel in pairs. So no real number can have fourth power , and
Compare (c) and (e) carefully. A negative number under an odd root is perfectly fine; under an even root it leaves the real numbers altogether. The index, not the minus sign alone, decides.
Evaluate each of the following.
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Answer
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Solution
The Rational Exponent Rule says may be computed either as or as . The two give the same answer, but taking the root first almost always keeps the numbers small, so that is the order used below.
A helpful way to read : the bottom number tells you which root to take, and the top number tells you which power to raise it to.
(a) . The denominator is , so take the cube root first. Since ,
The numerator is , so now square:
Check by the other order: , and since . Same answer, but it required cubing first.
(b) . Here , so this is just the square root:
(c) . The denominator is , so take the fourth root first. Since ,
The numerator is , so cube it:
Check by the other order: , and since . Same answer, with far more work.
(d) . Cube root first: , since . Then raise to the fourth power:
The mistake to avoid throughout: do not confuse the roles of top and bottom. In the is the root and the is the power. Reading it the other way round would give , which is not even a whole number.
Evaluate each of the following.
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Answer
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Solution
The Negative Exponent Rule says for . So a minus sign in the exponent means "take the reciprocal", and it says nothing at all about the sign of the answer.
(a) . Apply the rule with and :
Note the answer is positive. Writing would be wrong.
(b) .
An exponent of always produces the reciprocal of the base.
(c) . First apply the rule, taking the reciprocal of the whole thing:
Work out the bottom using the Power of a Quotient Rule:
So we need . Dividing by a fraction means multiplying by its reciprocal:
So the answer is . The useful shortcut visible here: a negative exponent on a fraction flips the fraction and then applies the positive exponent, since .
(d) . Apply the rule with :
Notice that this answer, like all the others, is positive, even though the exponent was negative and fractional. As the section puts it, the minus sign lives in the exponent and dictates division, not the sign of the value.
Simplify each expression. Assume every letter stands for a non-zero number.
(a) (b)
Answer
(a) (b)
Solution
Work from the inside out: deal with the brackets first, then combine what is left.
Part (a).
Step 1. Expand the bracket using the Power of a Product Rule, . The base inside is the product , so the exponent goes onto both factors:
Step 2. Work out each piece. First . Then use the Power of a Power Rule on the second piece, multiplying the exponents:
So the numerator is .
Step 3. Now divide by using the Quotient Rule, which subtracts exponents. The number is untouched, since there is no number to divide it by:
Part (b).
Step 1. Expand the bracket:
Here and the exponents and multiply to give .
Step 2. Divide, handling the numbers and the letters separately:
Check part (b) with a number. Put . The original expression is
and our simplified answer gives . They agree.
The most frequent error in problems like these is forgetting to raise the number inside the bracket to the power — writing instead of . The check above would have caught it immediately.
Find the missing exponent in each case.
(a) (b) (c)
Answer
(a) (b) (c)
Solution
These run the earlier exercises backwards: instead of being given an exponent and asked for a value, we are given the value and asked for the exponent.
(a) . Multiply 's together until appears:
So the exponent is .
(b) . The Negative Exponent Rule says . Reading it from right to left with :
So the exponent is . The rule is what converts "one over" into a minus sign upstairs.
(c) . This one needs more thought, because is smaller than , so the exponent will be a fraction between and .
The way in is to write both numbers as powers of the same base. Both are powers of :
Let the unknown exponent be . Then
using the Power of a Power Rule. We want this to equal , so we need the exponents to match:
Dividing both sides by gives
Check with the Rational Exponent Rule: take the fourth root of first, which is , then cube it to get . That is exactly , matching part (c) of an earlier exercise.
The technique used here — rewriting both sides as powers of a common base — is the standard way to attack a problem where the unknown sits in the exponent.
Evaluate and . Explain why the two answers differ.
Answer
and .
Solution
Work each one out from the inside.
. First square:
The minus signs cancel, leaving a positive number. Now take the square root:
So , not .
. First cube:
With three factors one minus sign has no partner, so the result is negative. Now take the cube root: we need with , and works. So
Why they differ. The two cases are governed by the last two lines of the table of root properties in this section:
When is odd, raising to the th power preserves the sign, so the root can undo it exactly and we get back unchanged.
When is even, raising to the th power destroys the sign — both and have square . The root cannot know which one it started from, and by convention it returns the positive one. So we get , not .
With the two formulas give and respectively, exactly the answers found above.
The practical rule. is never negative. If you ever produce a negative answer from an even-index root, you have made a sign error.
A cube-shaped tank has a volume of cubic metres.
(a) Find the length of one edge. (b) A second cube has edges three times as long. How many times larger is its volume?
Answer
(a) m (b) times
Solution
Part (a). For a cube with edge , the volume is multiplied by itself three times, that is,
We are told , so we need the number whose cube is . That is exactly what the cube root does:
Search for it: , too small; , exactly right. So
The index is odd, so this root is the only real one — there is no second answer to worry about. And in any case a length must be positive.
Check: . ✓
Part (b). The new edge is , so the new volume is
Apply the Power of a Product Rule, which puts the exponent onto each factor:
Since the old volume was , the new volume is times the old one.
Check with the actual numbers. The new edge is metres, so the new volume is
and . ✓
The point worth taking away. Tripling a length does not triple the volume — it multiplies it by . This is a direct consequence of the Power of a Product Rule, and it is why the answer surprises people. The same reasoning shows that tripling the edge multiplies the surface area by .
Evaluate in two ways: by taking the root first, and by taking the power first. Which order is easier, and why?
Answer
in both cases; taking the root first is far easier.
Solution
The Rational Exponent Rule offers both routes:
Here , and .
Route 1: root first. Take the sixth root of . We need with . Trying :
So . Now raise to the fifth power:
Route 2: power first. Raise to the fifth power:
Now take the sixth root of that number. We need with , and the answer is , since is indeed that number. So
Comparing the routes. Both give , as the rule promises. But Route 1 never dealt with a number larger than , while Route 2 required multiplying out a ten-digit number and then recognising it as a sixth power — something almost nobody could do without a calculator.
The general advice. Always take the root first when evaluating by hand. The root shrinks the number down to something manageable, and the power is then applied to a small quantity. The only time to prefer the other order is when the root of is not a whole number but the root of happens to be.
Simplify each expression, assuming .
(a) (b) , giving your answer as a fraction with a radical
Answer
(a) (b)
Solution
Part (a): .
The number is not a perfect cube — is too small and is too big — so the answer will not be a whole number. Instead we pull out the largest perfect cube hiding inside .
Look for a factor of that is a perfect cube. Since
and , we have found one. Now use the root property from the table of this section, , which is the Power of a Product Rule with :
Since ,
The remaining cannot be simplified further, because has no perfect-cube factor other than .
Check roughly: , so . And . ✓
Part (b): .
Step 1. Deal with the minus sign using the Negative Exponent Rule:
Step 2. Convert the fractional exponent into a radical using the Rational Exponent Rule, :
Step 3. Simplify the radical, exactly as in part (a), by splitting off the largest perfect cube. Since ,
So
which is the form shown in this section's own example.
Check with a number. Take . The original gives . Our answer gives . They agree.
A student writes , saying "the exponent goes onto each piece". Explain why this is wrong, and show it fails for , .
Solution
Why it is wrong. The student has taken the Power of a Product Rule,
and applied it to a sum. But that rule is about a product , not about a sum . There is no rule in this section — or anywhere — allowing an exponent to be distributed across a sign. The list of five laws should be read carefully on this point: every one of them involves multiplication, division, or repeated powers, and none of them involves addition of the bases.
Why the rule works for products but not sums. Go back to the definition, means copies of multiplied. So
where the middle step just reorders the factors, which multiplication permits. Now try the same with a sum:
and there is no way to rearrange this into , because the two brackets have to be multiplied out and that produces extra terms.
The numerical test. Put and .
The correct left-hand side:
The student's right-hand side:
Since , the claimed identity is false. A single counterexample is enough to demolish a claimed identity, and this one is worth memorising.
A remark. Try a second pair of numbers to confirm the failure is not a fluke. With and , the left side is while the right side is . Again they differ. The essential thing to carry away is the negative lesson: an exponent may never be distributed over a sum.
The same warning applies to roots, since a root is just a fractional exponent. For instance , while , and these differ.
A student writes , reasoning that "the square root undoes the square". Find the error and give the correct value.
Answer
The correct value is .
Solution
The correct value. Work from the inside out, which is always the safe approach:
and then
So .
The error. The student's slogan, "the square root undoes the square", is only half true. Squaring throws away the sign of a number: both and square to . Once that information is gone, no operation can recover it. The square root symbol must return a single definite value, and by the convention stated in this section it returns the non-negative one.
So squaring is not reversible in the way the student assumed. It sends two different inputs to the same output, and the root cannot tell them apart afterwards.
The rule that governs this. The table of root properties in this section states
With and this gives
matching our computation. The absolute value in the formula is precisely the record of the lost sign.
When the student's slogan is safe. It works when the index is odd, because an odd power keeps the sign. For instance
and here the root really does undo the cube exactly. It also works for even indices when the number started out non-negative: .
A quick self-check. An even-index root can never return a negative value. If your answer to a square root is negative, something has gone wrong.
Is the statement always true, sometimes true, or never true? Justify your answer, and state precisely when it holds.
Answer
Sometimes true; it holds exactly when .
Solution
The answer is sometimes.
A case where it holds. Take :
A case where it fails. Take :
but . Since , the statement is false here.
Since both outcomes occur, it is sometimes true.
Exactly when it holds. This section supplies the general formula for an even index:
So the statement amounts to the claim . Looking back at the definition of absolute value, precisely when is positive or zero. Therefore the statement holds exactly when
and fails for every negative . When we have instead , which is positive.
Why this matters. Expressions such as appear constantly, and it is tempting to cancel the root against the square automatically. That is safe only when you know the letter stands for a non-negative number. If the sign is unknown, the correct simplification is , keeping the bars until the sign can be settled.
A contrast. For an odd index no such caution is needed:
holds for every real , positive, negative or zero, because an odd power preserves sign and the odd root is unique. So the trouble is caused entirely by the even index, not by roots in general.
Explain why the rule cannot be used to evaluate within the real numbers.
Solution
What goes wrong. Look at the two factors on the left separately.
The expression asks for a real number with . But squaring any real number gives a result that is zero or positive, so no such real exists. The same applies to . As this section records, is not a real number when and is even.
So the left-hand side is a product of two things that do not exist as real numbers. There is nothing there to multiply, and the rule has nothing to act on.
The condition attached to the rule. The table of root properties in this section is stated under the standing assumption that all the roots involved exist as real numbers. The section then adds an explicit warning for exactly this situation: when is even and both and , the quantity does exist, because comes out positive, yet and individually do not. In that case the root may not be split.
The trap this creates. The right-hand side looks perfectly harmless:
since two negatives multiply to a positive. A student who splits the root the wrong way round may therefore feel that the calculation has succeeded, when in fact the middle step never made sense.
To be clear about what is legitimate: computing by multiplying first and taking the root second is entirely correct and gives . What is not permitted is taking the roots first and multiplying second, since the intermediate quantities are not real numbers.
The lesson. Every rule in this section carries conditions — for the Quotient Rule, for the Power of a Quotient Rule, existence of the roots for the radical properties. Before applying a rule, check its conditions. Here, the order in which you multiply and take roots genuinely changes whether the working is valid.
Use the Power of a Power Rule to show that for , and verify your result with .
Solution
The general argument. The Power of a Power Rule says
and this section stresses that the definitions of fractional exponents were chosen precisely so that this law continues to hold when and are not whole numbers.
Apply it with and :
Multiply the two fractions in the exponent, multiplying tops together and bottoms together:
Therefore
In radical language this reads : taking a square root and then a cube root is the same as taking a sixth root in one go. That is the third line of the table of root properties in this section, with and .
Verification with .
Left side, one step at a time. First the square root:
since . Then the cube root of that:
since . So the left side is .
Right side. We need the sixth root of , that is, the number whose sixth power is :
so .
Both sides equal , confirming the identity in this case.
A remark on why it works. Taking a square root splits the exponent in half, and taking a cube root splits what remains into thirds. Doing both divides the original exponent by altogether — which is why the fractions multiply rather than add. Contrast this with , where the base is the same and the exponents would be added, giving , a different quantity entirely.
Simplify as far as possible for an arbitrary real number , and evaluate it at and at .
Answer
; this equals at and at .
Solution
Handle the two terms separately, because they behave differently.
The first term, . The index is , which is even. The table of root properties in this section gives for even , so
The absolute value bars must be kept, because we are told only that is some real number and we do not know its sign.
The second term, . The index is , which is odd. The table gives for odd , so
with no bars needed. An odd power preserves the sign and the odd root is unique, so nothing is lost.
Putting them together.
This can be taken further by splitting into cases, using the definition of absolute value from the earlier section.
- If , then , so the expression is .
- If , then , so the expression is .
So the whole expression collapses to for every negative , and to for every non-negative .
Evaluation at . Using the case rule, is negative, so the answer is . Checking directly:
and . ✓
Evaluation at . Here is positive, so the answer should be . Checking directly:
and . ✓
The moral. Writing would have given for every , and at that predicts instead of the true value . The absolute value is not decoration; dropping it changes the answer.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the five laws of exponents?
For a base b and positive integer exponents m and n, they are the Product Rule , the Quotient Rule with , the Power of a Power Rule , the Power of a Product Rule , and the Power of a Quotient Rule with . Each one is just bookkeeping on repeated multiplication: writing out as five copies of b is the whole proof of the first.
Why is ?
Because the Quotient Rule forces it. Dividing by itself gives , while the rule gives , so the two must agree and for every . It is not an arbitrary convention but the only value that keeps the existing laws consistent. The restriction matters, since is a separate question treated below.
What is the difference between and ?
Exponentiation is performed before negation, so means "the opposite of " while means "the th power of ". Thus but . The two agree whenever is odd and differ whenever is even. When the base is negative, the parentheses are not optional.
Why does a negative exponent not make the result negative?
A negative exponent signals a fractional reciprocal, not a negative value. By the Negative Exponent Rule, . For example, , which is a positive number. The minus sign lives in the exponent, dictating division, not the sign of the final value.
Why is rather than ?
The square root symbol denotes the nonnegative root, so its output can never be negative. If then and , which is and not . Writing therefore gives the wrong answer for every negative . The same care is needed for any even root: , while for odd roots no absolute value is required and always.
When does fail?
This identity requires both and to exist as real numbers. When is even and both and , each individual root is imaginary, yet is real (since multiplying two negatives makes a positive ). In that scenario, the identity cannot be applied directly using real arithmetic.
Why is undefined?
The expression causes a conflict between two fundamental rules of math:
- The Zero Exponent Rule: for all non-zero . This suggests should equal .
- The Base Zero Rule: for all positive exponents . If we calculate using positive numbers closer and closer to zero (e.g., , ), the result is always . This suggests should equal .
Because limits approaching give conflicting answers depending on the direction you approach from, we consider undefined. However, it is worth noting that in certain branches of algebra and combinatorics, mathematicians explicitly define to simplify polynomial formulas (like the binomial theorem). For general arithmetic purposes, it remains undefined.