Vanilla Forums has been nominated for a second time in the CMS Critic "Critic's Choice" awards, and we need your vote! Read more here, and then do the thing (please).
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

123468

Posts

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

    well in this case setting 0! to 0 just makes a useless branch of mathematics. the fork just isnt interesting

  • StraightziStraightzi The rock, the vulture, and the chain All that the proud can feel of painRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    My friend got the Pythagorean theorem tattooed on his arm earlier today.

  • GenericFanGenericFan Registered User
    edited May 2008
    That's a pretty boring formula to get tattooed.

    Any particular reason it was that one?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    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

    More like Linear Algebra

  • StraightziStraightzi The rock, the vulture, and the chain All that the proud can feel of painRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    well the way he got it is a right triangle, with the sides labeled a, b, and sqrt(a^2+b^2). But yeah, I agree, kinda boring, but he has been dead set on this for fucking ever.

  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    250px-Pythagorean.svg.png

    some form of that (without the labels) would be a classy way to do it

    only smart people would get it

  • musanmanmusanman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Tossrock wrote: »
    250px-Pythagorean.svg.png

    some form of that (without the labels) would be a classy way to do it

    only smart people would get it

    If you're going to go that route do a cool proof. We had presidents that thought this shit up during congressional hearings and had discussions about it.

    How many congressman we have now do you think could understand this:
    image5.gif

    sic2sig.jpg
  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    musanman wrote: »
    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.

    One of the good things that my teacher does is use the complicated solutions to stuff like 0! = 1, even if only a few people in the class get it. A lot better than teaching to the slowest students like most teachers at my high school do and ignoring the other end of the class. I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet here, being better at maths than the people at my school is really nothing.

  • redfenixredfenix Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    i know like the first 50 digits of pi

    yeah, that's useful

  • FramlingFramling Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    redfenix wrote: »
    i know like the first 50 digits of pi

    yeah, that's useful

    I was at a physics bowl once in high school, and at the end, our team was in a three-way tie for 1st. They asked us about six tie-breaker questions, which all three teams kept getting right, when the moderator finally threw up his hands and said "Whoever knows the most digits of pi wins!"

    I won $40 for everyone on my team.

    Also, I submit that knot theory is the sexiest math.

    you're = you are
    your = belonging to you

    their = belonging to them
    there = not here
    they're = they are
  • Lucky CynicLucky Cynic Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I like how I have stumped countless math teachers with this one puzzle.

    Only one of them that I recall has actually gotten it, and it took them a good whole lunch period to figure it out.

  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Let's see...
    Spoiler:

    On review, it appears I swapped a few digits

    whoops

  • Lucky CynicLucky Cynic Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Tossrock wrote: »
    Let's see...
    Spoiler:

    On review, it appears I swapped a few digits

    whoops

    I've always wondered how accurate these lists were. Is there like a notepad file somewhere that has the actual listing of the numbers or what?

  • FramlingFramling Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Tossrock wrote: »
    Let's see...
    Spoiler:

    On review, it appears I swapped a few digits

    whoops

    Hahaha, the last bit I know is ...327950, just barely enough to correct you.

    you're = you are
    your = belonging to you

    their = belonging to them
    there = not here
    they're = they are
  • Lucky CynicLucky Cynic Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Where's that Toothpaste for dinner comic?


    "How many digits of Pi should you know?

    3.14 - Enough for common man.
    3.141591 - Enough for Scientists.
    3.141592653........ - You're an asshole.

  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Framling wrote: »
    Tossrock wrote: »
    Let's see...
    Spoiler:

    On review, it appears I swapped a few digits

    whoops

    Hahaha, the last bit I know is ...327950, just barely enough to correct you.

    Yeah

    I originally memorized it in syllabicly pleasing blocks, of three at first (six-two-six four-three-three eight-three-two seven-nine-five, etc)

    832 795 1497 0288 169 39937 510 582

    I swapped the positions of the 0288 and 1497 blocks, and 1497 should actually be 4197

    hurray, wasted hours in math class

  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Where's that Toothpaste for dinner comic?


    "How many digits of Pi should you know?

    3.14 - Enough for common man.
    3.141591 - Enough for Scientists.
    3.141592653........ - You're an asshole.

    http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?p=4818100#post4818100

  • stimtokolosstimtokolos Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I like this maths riddle, but I'm sure for math duders it wouldn't be hard. I only heard it the other day and overlooked the flaw, only looked for like 2 minutes, didn't want to depart from the guy who told me without knowing the answer because I wouldn't see him for a bit.

    x^2 - x^2 = x^2 - x^2
    x ( x - x ) = (x + x) ( x - x)
    x = 2x

    I hope I didn't fuck it up

    What is wrong with it :
    Spoiler:

  • trentsteeltrentsteel Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    So, what the hell is calculus?

    Please explain as you would to a child or dog.

    http://www.botsnthings.com/
    I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!

  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Finding the equations of lines tangential to curves (a straight line that touches the curve at one point), and areas between curves and axes (the 0 lines on a graph) is about the most simple stuff.

  • trentsteeltrentsteel Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    WHOAAA

    you lost me at tangarine

    http://www.botsnthings.com/
    I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!

  • LarlarLarlar Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited May 2008
    Fram, you should talk to nap. He's in his own private math universe.

    I was in there once. We picked up a couple of eigenvalues and went to see The Matrix.

    iwantanswers3.png
  • ProlegomenaProlegomena Frictionless Spinning The VoidRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
  • TossrockTossrock too weird to live too rare to dieRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Was it diagonalizable?

  • LarlarLarlar Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited May 2008
    booo

    Someone buys their panties from August Möbius.

    iwantanswers3.png
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    larlar

    what is up, sir

    how goes being a preposterously attractive man

    does it go well

    chillaxton.jpg
    and I broke parole just to get to you
  • trentsteeltrentsteel Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Hey wasn't someone explaining to me once that the whole "nature is full of patterns" thing is bullshit?



    I told a mathematician about the plot of PI once and boy did he laugh his ass off.

    His simple reply was, "No."

    http://www.botsnthings.com/
    I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!

  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    There's always the golden ratio - a lot of ratios of bone lengths (shoulder to elbow and elbow to wrist I think) have a length ratio of 1:1.618, as do a bunch of other things.

    Humans have quite a habit of looking for patterns in everything though, like that rock on mars that looked like a face and then NASA took another picture at a different time of day from a different angle and it looked like nothing.

  • TavTav Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    De Moivres was a cunt.

  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    "It is reported in all seriousness that de Moivre correctly predicted the day of his own death. Noting that he was sleeping 15 minutes longer each day, De Moivre surmised that he would die on the day he would sleep for 24 hours. A simple mathematical calculation quickly yielded the date, November 27, 1754. He did indeed pass away on that day."

    That's pretty awesome.

  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy

    chillaxton.jpg
    and I broke parole just to get to you
  • KovakKovak did a lot of drugs married cher?Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    shit im already sleeping for like 12 hours

  • BusterKBusterK Negativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Kovak wrote: »
    shit im already sleeping for like 12 hours

    Then I suppose you're due for a mid-life crisis

    Visit http://www.cruzflores.com for all your Cruz Flores needs. Also listen to the podcast I do with Penguin Incarnate http://wgsgshow.podomatic.com
    Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
  • FramlingFramling Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    trentsteel wrote: »
    Hey wasn't someone explaining to me once that the whole "nature is full of patterns" thing is bullshit?



    I told a mathematician about the plot of PI once and boy did he laugh his ass off.

    His simple reply was, "No."

    I liked the part where they said they were looking for a 216-digit number and that they'd tried them all.

    All
    Spoiler:
    of them, I guess.

    you're = you are
    your = belonging to you

    their = belonging to them
    there = not here
    they're = they are
  • BusterKBusterK Negativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Maybe they put in some overtime

    Visit http://www.cruzflores.com for all your Cruz Flores needs. Also listen to the podcast I do with Penguin Incarnate http://wgsgshow.podomatic.com
    Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
  • FramlingFramling Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Larlar wrote: »
    Fram, you should talk to nap. He's in his own private math universe.

    I was in there once. We picked up a couple of eigenvalues and went to see The Matrix.

    I remember once the conversation had turned to big numbers and he threw out something and I just came right back with either g_64 or A(g_64,g_64), I can't remember which, but he was just like "Damn, you don't fuck around, do you?"

    (I do not.)

    But yeah, I get the feeling we're in about the same boat, finding really it fascinating but not being very good at actually working through it all.

    you're = you are
    your = belonging to you

    their = belonging to them
    there = not here
    they're = they are
  • Indie WinterIndie Winter Nattravnen Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    This thread reminds me of someone
    Spoiler:

    ShhxB.gif
  • ThatDudeOverThereThatDudeOverThere MY FINEST CREATION oh nevermind it's deadRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    what the fuck is that?

    nHu0VJL.png
    My Youtube My Steam SMITE IGN: TDOTCRFH4 come SMITE with me
  • LarlarLarlar Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited May 2008
    Framling wrote: »
    Larlar wrote: »
    Fram, you should talk to nap. He's in his own private math universe.

    I was in there once. We picked up a couple of eigenvalues and went to see The Matrix.

    I remember once the conversation had turned to big numbers and he threw out something and I just came right back with either g_64 or A(g_64,g_64), I can't remember which, but he was just like "Damn, you don't fuck around, do you?"

    (I do not.)

    But yeah, I get the feeling we're in about the same boat, finding really it fascinating but not being very good at actually working through it all.

    Sometimes I think Graham brought attention to that number just to spite the future. Seems to be the growing trend. Another 500 years from now, math and sadism will be considered the same fetish.

    iwantanswers3.png
  • StraightziStraightzi The rock, the vulture, and the chain All that the proud can feel of painRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Larlar wrote: »
    Framling wrote: »
    Larlar wrote: »
    Fram, you should talk to nap. He's in his own private math universe.

    I was in there once. We picked up a couple of eigenvalues and went to see The Matrix.

    I remember once the conversation had turned to big numbers and he threw out something and I just came right back with either g_64 or A(g_64,g_64), I can't remember which, but he was just like "Damn, you don't fuck around, do you?"

    (I do not.)

    But yeah, I get the feeling we're in about the same boat, finding really it fascinating but not being very good at actually working through it all.

    Sometimes I think Graham brought attention to that number just to spite the future. Seems to be the growing trend. Another 500 years from now, math and sadism will be considered the same fetish.

    At what point in the future does math become a fetish?

Sign In or Register to comment.