The holiday hangout will go online tomorrow! If there's anything in the regular subforums that you're going to want to access over the holidays, copy it now while it's still accessible.
Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

MATH

123578

Posts

  • KingAgamemnonKingAgamemnon Registered User
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    I amended it to the Gamma Function, do you still disagree? I'm not wrong in this case.

    I don't think you understand my complaint.

    I am not disagreeing with the mathematics of 0! = 1. There is no doubt in my mind, as I can prove it using sound math logic and even argue for the point of 0! = 1.

    All of the math background and experience with algebra will not convince me. You must argue this point using no mathematics for the conversation to be interesting.

    That would be above me then, I've only explored the Gamma Function to do fun things like take negative factorials, and complex factorials.

    Well, a google search brings up this, which fits your criteria. Not exactly rigorous but logically sound.

  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    okay come on my explanation is pretty good

  • yourclothesyourclothes __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2008
    i am dumb as hell


    imo

    ssseeee.gif
  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    okay

    N!

    factorial counts how many ways you can line up N distinct objects

    You know like you have 3 objects

    for your first slot

    you have 3 options, then one is taken so you have 2 options, then there is one left so you have 1 option

    3*2*1

    Now how many ways do you have to line up 0 objects

    1

    1 ways

    No, I can't line up 0 objects in any fashion.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    okay

    N!

    factorial counts how many ways you can line up N distinct objects

    You know like you have 3 objects

    for your first slot

    you have 3 options, then one is taken so you have 2 options, then there is one left so you have 1 option

    3*2*1

    Now how many ways do you have to line up 0 objects

    1

    1 ways

    No, I can't line up 0 objects in any fashion.

    hey asshole that is actually 1 way to line them up

  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    if you can show me how you can pick more than the option of not lining up 0 objects then well damn im pretty sure you broke everything

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    okay

    N!

    factorial counts how many ways you can line up N distinct objects

    You know like you have 3 objects

    for your first slot

    you have 3 options, then one is taken so you have 2 options, then there is one left so you have 1 option

    3*2*1

    Now how many ways do you have to line up 0 objects

    1

    1 ways

    No, I can't line up 0 objects in any fashion.

    hey asshole that is actually 1 way to line them up

    None is 1. I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR GIB SAILOR.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    okay

    N!

    factorial counts how many ways you can line up N distinct objects

    You know like you have 3 objects

    for your first slot

    you have 3 options, then one is taken so you have 2 options, then there is one left so you have 1 option

    3*2*1

    Now how many ways do you have to line up 0 objects

    1

    1 ways

    No, I can't line up 0 objects in any fashion.

    hey asshole that is actually 1 way to line them up

    None is 1. I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR GIB SAILOR.

    OKAY to explain how none is possibly an option

    YOU HAVE A CAKE

    HOW MANY CHOICES DO YOU HAVE IF YOU CAN PICK FROM THESE ACTIONS

    eat cake

    not eat cake

    nothing

  • yourclothesyourclothes __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2008
    i think math makes me sick

    ssseeee.gif
  • yourclothesyourclothes __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2008
    kovak you are making my tummy hurt

    ssseeee.gif
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    But I thought the whole thing was there was no cake?

    bar-cc-1.jpg
  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    okay

    N!

    factorial counts how many ways you can line up N distinct objects

    You know like you have 3 objects

    for your first slot

    you have 3 options, then one is taken so you have 2 options, then there is one left so you have 1 option

    3*2*1

    Now how many ways do you have to line up 0 objects

    1

    1 ways

    No, I can't line up 0 objects in any fashion.

    hey asshole that is actually 1 way to line them up

    None is 1. I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR GIB SAILOR.

    OKAY to explain how none is possibly an option

    YOU HAVE A CAKE

    HOW MANY CHOICES DO YOU HAVE IF YOU CAN PICK FROM THESE ACTIONS

    eat cake

    not eat cake

    nothing

    Actually in that case I think you have 2 cases. Nothing isn't really a choice because if it was, there wouldn't be a cake.

    But I understand your idea "no ideas to line the up is the only option" = 1

    My problem is the multiplication, and zero, is that when you multiply fucking anything by 0 guess what you get.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    How many ways can you not eat cake?

    None

    because cake is delicious

    bar-cc-1.jpg
  • KingAgamemnonKingAgamemnon Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Also, musaman, arbitrarily saying things like "you must argue this point using no mathematics, in order to be interesting" is ridiculous. I'll argue things how they need to be argued.

  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    javen i love you

    but

    why you gotta make me hit you baby

  • yourclothesyourclothes __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2008
    the cake is a spy

    (comic depicting a cake turning into a spy)

    please give me money now

    ssseeee.gif
  • KingAgamemnonKingAgamemnon Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Javen wrote: »
    How many ways can you not eat cake?

    None

    because cake is delicious

    What about yellow sheet cake, with plain "white" frosting?

  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Also, musaman, arbitrarily saying things like "you must argue this point using no mathematics, in order to be interesting" is ridiculous. I'll argue things how they need to be argued.

    honestly coming in and demanding that mathematical facts be proven without math is a bit like

    going to church and asking the preacher to explain everything without god

    or even speaking

    he's just gotta wave his dick around

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Javen wrote: »
    How many ways can you not eat cake?

    None

    because cake is delicious

    this cake comment is a lie

    I've had like 1 cake that was delicious.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    hay guys also factorial works for values that aren't integers

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    Also, musaman, arbitrarily saying things like "you must argue this point using no mathematics, in order to be interesting" is ridiculous. I'll argue things how they need to be argued.

    honestly coming in and demanding that mathematical facts be proven without math is a bit like

    going to church and asking the preacher to explain everything without god

    or even speaking

    he's just gotta wave his dick around

    ok I'll show my hand...

    I teach algebra and statistics and both of these subjects involve this discussion. You can't argue with 9th graders using mathematics like a gamma function. I am not satisfied saying "because"

    I would like to keep the conversation going, so more points of view are better.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    Also, musaman, arbitrarily saying things like "you must argue this point using no mathematics, in order to be interesting" is ridiculous. I'll argue things how they need to be argued.

    honestly coming in and demanding that mathematical facts be proven without math is a bit like

    going to church and asking the preacher to explain everything without god

    or even speaking

    he's just gotta wave his dick around

    ok I'll show my hand...

    I teach algebra and statistics and both of these subjects involve this discussion. You can't argue with 9th graders using mathematics like a gamma function. I am not satisfied saying "because"

    I would like to keep the conversation going, so more points of view are better.

    Honestly, even the definition of the simple factorial function is defined from 1 to infinity and just sets 0! as 1.

    My lining up way works as one of the simplest reasons to explain why it's gotta be 1 is in probability calculations.

    There really is no "simple" and sound mathematical proof.

    Your students need to learn that sometimes they just gotta accept something till they get smarter

  • KingAgamemnonKingAgamemnon Registered User
    edited May 2008
    So, how have you explained it?

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    Also, musaman, arbitrarily saying things like "you must argue this point using no mathematics, in order to be interesting" is ridiculous. I'll argue things how they need to be argued.

    honestly coming in and demanding that mathematical facts be proven without math is a bit like

    going to church and asking the preacher to explain everything without god

    or even speaking

    he's just gotta wave his dick around

    ok I'll show my hand...

    I teach algebra and statistics and both of these subjects involve this discussion. You can't argue with 9th graders using mathematics like a gamma function. I am not satisfied saying "because"

    I would like to keep the conversation going, so more points of view are better.

    Honestly, even the definition of the simple factorial function is defined from 1 to infinity and just sets 0! as 1.

    My lining up way works as one of the simplest reasons to explain why it's gotta be 1 is in probability calculations.

    There really is no "simple" and sound mathematical proof.

    Your students need to learn that sometimes they just gotta accept something till they get smarter

    Well...if you accept 1! = 1 then define the factorial function as x! = x * (x-1)!
    so:
    1! = 1 * (1-1)!
    1 = 1 * 0!
    1 = 0!

    Nobody really has a problem with 1!, but fuck zero factorial.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    that is probably the best mathematical solution you're going to get that algebra students can understand

    The lining up is the best nonmathematical explanation I can think of

  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    whenever I see an exclamation point I still see it as saying whatever comes before it excitedly.

    One! Equals one.

    bar-cc-1.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    javen lets get married

    ill take care of your poor literature majoring self with my hard science

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Javen wrote: »
    whenever I see an exclamation point I still see it as saying whatever comes before it excitedly.

    One! Equals one.

    I scream. "6! is not SIIIIXXXXXXXXXX" it's 6*5*4*3*2*1

    sic2sig.jpg
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Why can't it be both

    bar-cc-1.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

    I can rock geometry hardcore. There aren't a whole lot of assumptions there that's a definition.

    Now rationalizing the denominator...we were big on "no negative exponents" so that's about my best defense but really, why do we do that.

    sic2sig.jpg
  • yourclothesyourclothes __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2008
    what is the sexiest math

    ssseeee.gif
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

    I can rock geometry hardcore. There aren't a whole lot of assumptions there that's a definition.

    Now rationalizing the denominator...we were big on "no negative exponents" so that's about my best defense but really, why do we do that.

    there's no point to rationalizing

    it's just kinda dumb really.

    also. there are 5 assumptions in euclidean geometry.

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    what is the sexiest math

    geometry is the sexiest no doubt...it pretty much created how we argue

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    what is the sexiest math

    geometry is the sexiest no doubt...it pretty much created how we argue

    algebra is like geometry's high class cousin

    it's way sexier

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

    I can rock geometry hardcore. There aren't a whole lot of assumptions there that's a definition.

    Now rationalizing the denominator...we were big on "no negative exponents" so that's about my best defense but really, why do we do that.

    there's no point to rationalizing

    it's just kinda dumb really.

    also. there are 5 assumptions in euclidean geometry.

    There are 5 basic postulates, P5 being the one that is "optional." That creates non-euclid geometry (when I say P5 I mean the one about assuming lines with less than 180 interior sum will result in an intersection)

    sic2sig.jpg
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    calculus will do things to your number you never thought possible though

  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

    I can rock geometry hardcore. There aren't a whole lot of assumptions there that's a definition.

    Now rationalizing the denominator...we were big on "no negative exponents" so that's about my best defense but really, why do we do that.

    there's no point to rationalizing

    it's just kinda dumb really.

    also. there are 5 assumptions in euclidean geometry.

    There are 5 basic postulates, P5 being the one that is "optional." That creates non-euclid geometry (when I say P5 I mean the one about assuming lines with less than 180 interior sum will result in an intersection)

    that's what i'm saying.

    That is just as much as saying 0! = 1

    it's really almost as basic

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    musanman wrote: »
    Kovak wrote: »
    i mean really 0! is just like parallel lines

    there are certain basic things you have to assume

    I can rock geometry hardcore. There aren't a whole lot of assumptions there that's a definition.

    Now rationalizing the denominator...we were big on "no negative exponents" so that's about my best defense but really, why do we do that.

    there's no point to rationalizing

    it's just kinda dumb really.

    also. there are 5 assumptions in euclidean geometry.

    There are 5 basic postulates, P5 being the one that is "optional." That creates non-euclid geometry (when I say P5 I mean the one about assuming lines with less than 180 interior sum will result in an intersection)

    that's what i'm saying.

    That is just as much as saying 0! = 1

    it's really almost as basic

    I dunno I think of P5 as more of a fork in mathematics though. 0! = 1 is never really argued against. Nobody is like "well what is 0! was 0 let's create a branch of math"

    I hate leaving students unsatisfied with "because it is" when math is sound enough to be explained.

    sic2sig.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.