48÷2(9+3) = ????

[IronMaxipad]

What is your answer?

48÷2(9+3) = ????

[King]

If you use PEMDAS, it's 2. But, there's plenty of argument out there for 288.

[IronMaxipad]

To further stir the pot:

http://i.imgur.com/kf8q3.jpg

WTF.

LOL also some guy said either 438 or 0.5... :lol

[LakerHater]

288 is what I got

edit: my comp. got 2?? :lol

[David Bowie]

2, can't even see how its 288

[RedsLakers24]

I got 2,

[IronMaxipad]

2, can't even see how its 288

48÷2(9+3)
48÷2(12)
24(12)
288

Working from left to right.

[Sausage]

288

[baseline bum]

This is why I have been advocating doing math in postfix for so long...

[SourCandy]

"texas instruments" that's your problem.

[IronMaxipad]

Here's a Casio vs TI
http://i.imgur.com/G0n6c.jpg

[baseline bum]

See, Matlab knows what time it is...

http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/581/matlab.png

[DMX7]

The answer is 2.

(9+3)= 12

Then, 2 x (12)= 24

Finally, 48/ 24 =2.

Basic order of operations

[Dex]

PEDMAS.

http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops.htm

The answer is 2.

[IronMaxipad]

The answer is 2.

(9+3)= 12

Then, 2 x (12)= 24

Finally, 48/ 24 =2.

Basic order of operations

You have to go from left to right. So first you do whats inside the parenthesis. Then you have to do Division or Multiplication. Since division is first you divide first then multiply. so the answer is: 288, imo, tbh.

48÷2(9+3)
48÷2(12)
24(12)
288

[IronMaxipad]

PEDMAS.

http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops.htm

The answer is 2.
From that same article:

"When you have a bunch of operations of the same rank, you just operate from left to right. (multiplication and division are at the same rank)"


Answer is 288

[Dex]

From that same article:

"When you have a bunch of operations of the same rank, you just operate from left to right. (multiplication and division are at the same rank)"


Answer is 288

Tricky maths. Pretty sure you're right, tho.

From another article:


Notice that the M and D are grouped together, as are the A and S. This is because Multiplication and Division are at the same priority level, and should be done in left to right order. Likewise, Addition and Subtraction are at the same priority level, and should be done in left to right order.

http://www.virtu-software.com/ask-doug/QandA.asp?q=80

288 it is.

[DMX7]

From that same article:

"When you have a bunch of operations of the same rank, you just operate from left to right. (multiplication and division are at the same rank)"


Answer is 288

Yeah, you're right. Good call, it's: P, E, M or D (left to right), A or S (left to right).

[baseline bum]

C says 288 (gcc 4.4.5)

http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/4664/assoc.png

[ashbeeigh]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.

[DMX7]

Excel says 288 too.

[Dex]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.

Apparently 6th grade math gets pretty tricky sometimes.

[MannyIsGod]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.

The answer is 288. Apparently you need to go back to the 6th grade.

[MannyIsGod]

The 48 is being divided by the 2 and not the product of the 2 and the parentheses. In order to get 2 you need the following equation:

48/[2(9+3)]

The 2 is not within a set of parentheses and 2(9+3) really means 2*(9+3) so that equation really is 48/2*(9+3). Being next to a parentheses is not the same as being inside of a set.

[baseline bum]

The answer is 288. Apparently you need to go back to the 6th grade.

Why can't people just write it in the clear form of 48 2 ÷ 9 3 + * ???

Easy then...

48 2 ÷ 9 3 + *
24 9 3 + *
24 12 *
288

[Dex]

x = (-b +/- √b^2-4ac) / 2a

[Stringer_Bell]

48 Divided By all the shit that comes after it

the answer is 2

[MannyIsGod]

BTW, my goto calculator for all non graphing purposes is a casio like the one above. It came up with 2.

I wonder if I can get my money back for it being broken.

[baseline bum]

BTW, my goto calculator for all non graphing purposes is a casio like the one above. It came up with 2.

I wonder if I can get my money back for it being broken.

It really is ambiguous and based on context; 288 is the form that is normally used, but you'll see the rules applied in a way to get 2 in a lot of mathematical literature. It's usually clear which of the two is meant.

e.g.,

∫ x dx = 1/2x^2 + C

1/2 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/20 + 1/30 + ... + 1/n(n+1) + ...

[Libri]

Why can't people just write it in the clear form of 48 2 ÷ 9 3 + * ???

Easy then...

48 2 ÷ 9 3 + *
24 9 3 + *
24 12 *
288

I've seen some use parenthesis and commas in order to avoid the problem of putting the numbers together: (24,12)*

[Dice]

Should look like this instead:

48
2(9+3)


That makes order of operation simple.

[Sisk]

TheMachine is asian. Someone page him.

[ploto]

You do what is inside the () first.

48÷2(9+3)
48÷2*12

Then you do M or D from left to right.

24*12
288

Google calculator gets it right.

You have to add () around 2(9+3) to get 2.

48/(2(9+3))

Parentheses from inside out.
48/(2(12))
48/24
2

[fraga]

2

[boutons_deux]

Do operations in parentheses and other grouping symbols first. If there are grouping symbols within other grouping symbols do the innermost first.

(12)

Do multiplication and division operations from left to right.

48 / 2 = 24

24 * 12 = 288

Do addition and subtraction operations from left to right

http://www.aaamath.com/pro73c-order-of-operations.html

[Drachen]

Really? It's 288 plain as day.

[thispego]

See, this is where math lost me, and I was like "alright, fuck you, math."

[DMC]

(48 / 2) * (9 + 3) = 288

[Venti Quattro]

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%C3%B72%289%2B3%29

[Sense]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.

:lol

[Greg Oden]

TheMachine is asian. Someone page him.

I'd rather we wait for lakaluva's opinion.

[Calculuva]

Good day, my good friends! This is Lakaluva's calculus tutor and I'm sure that I can give you pretty good insight on this simplistic math problem.

I think that the correct answer is 2 because even the machines do the calculations by parentheses. However it never interprets which has more parenthesis, but rather it does a left to right calculation. That means that you guys should properly put the equation in parenthesis from left to right since the machines interpret it that way. It's more of how we input it in the machines since the answer is obvious if we do it by hand.

If you wanted to reflect the PEMDAS rule, your calculator input should be 48÷2((9+3)).

Hope this helped you.

Good day again!

From Pakistan,
Calculuva

[MannyIsGod]

Should look like this instead:

48
2(9+3)


That makes order of operation simple.

Thats different though. That in a linear equation is 48/[2(9+3)]

Thats the point a lot of people have made. IF it was the way you typed out then the answer would be 2.

[Dex]

x/0 = ∅

[Kori Ellis]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.

No, it's 288.

You do what's in the parenthesis first, and then start at the left side of the equation.

[Kori Ellis]

To get 2, it would have to be written like..


48÷(2(9+3)) = ????

[Venti Quattro]

To get 2, it would have to be written like..

48÷(2(9+3)) = ????

what Calculuva said

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

This was great. :tu

[Kyle Orton]

The answer is 2. Don't be stupid, people. This is like 6th grade math.
:lmao:lmao:lmao dumbfuck menopausal cunt

[Kyle Orton]

And not to pile on, but "both answers" aren't right. It's 288. You do it left to right with mult/div, basic order of operations. If you picked 2, you're wrong.

As for why the calculator said 2, it's a weirdly written problem

[Sisk]

And not to pile on, but "both answers" aren't right. It's 288. You do it left to right with mult/div, basic order of operations. If you picked 2, you're wrong.

As for why the calculator said 2, it's a weirdly written problem

Well, that's settled.

[Hooks]

This thread gave me a headache just reading all this math shit, fuck algebra!

[baseline bum]

This thread gave me a headache just reading all this math shit, fuck algebra!

That's arithmetic, not algebra.

[Norcal's MathTeacher]

I was looking forward to the day when dear Norcal and I could explore the maths. What a pity he could never get past simple addition and subtraction.

[Wild Cobra]

If you use PEMDAS, it's 2. But, there's plenty of argument out there for 288.
The 2 is not inside the parenthesis. It would be the same as 48÷2x(9+3). For the answer to be 2, it would have to be written 48÷(2(9+3)).

[Wild Cobra]

Why can't people just write it in the clear form of 48 2 ÷ 9 3 + * ???

Easy then...

48 2 ÷ 9 3 + *
24 9 3 + *
24 12 *
288
Algebratic notation is different. they mixed the form which I don't like. Times and variable "X" get confusing.

[Darrin]

288. Work left to right. Jeez.

[sonic21]

48÷2(9+3)=288

you always have to start at the left side after dealing the the parenthesis

[Borosai]

I'm out of touch with my math side.

[BruceBowenFan]

The answer is 2.

9+3 is 12. 12*2 is 24. 48/24 is two.

[Isitjustme?]

Its 2 using

Please

Excuse

My

Dear

Aunt

Sally

[Isitjustme?]

PEMDAS for beginners...

[dimsah]

PEMDAS states that operations of the same rank go left to right. Regardless of their position in the acronym, division and multiplication have the same rank.

The answer is 288.

[Wild Cobra]

PEMDAS states that operations of the same rank go left to right. Regardless of their position in the acronym, division and multiplication have the same rank.

The answer is 288.
Correct.

48 ÷ 2(9+3)

becomes

48 ÷ 2 X (9+3)

becomes

48 ÷ 2 X 12

[Sense]

Wow there's 3 pages of people explaining the idiots who keep saying 2.. why it's not 2... and yet they keep saying 2 lol

[romad_20]

This is pretty basic stuff, its 288. God help us all...

[Dex]

This is all Mrs. Morris' fault.

[MannyIsGod]

Wow there's 3 pages of people explaining the idiots who keep saying 2.. why it's not 2... and yet they keep saying 2 lol

I was thinking the same thing. Some people are just fucking stupid man.

[Venti Quattro]

It's 288. Really simple math. For it to be 2, the number 2 has to be enclosed too.

[baseline bum]

I was thinking the same thing. Some people are just fucking stupid man.

Both interpretations are commonly seen in mathematical literature. The reason you're seeing different answers is because the problem is ambiguous; not because people are stupid.

[Venti Quattro]

Both interpretations are commonly seen in mathematical literature. The reason you're seeing different answers is because the problem is ambiguous; not because people are stupid.

It's not ambiguous. There is a set of defined rules that can solve this problem.

[baseline bum]

It's not ambiguous. There is a set of defined rules that can solve this problem.

It is ambiguous; its meaning is determined from context. Like I said earlier in the thread, it's clear what expressions like these two mean from context, not from hard and fast rules that some 6th grade teacher told you:

∫ x dx = 1/2x^2 + C

1/2 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/20 + 1/30 + ... + 1/n(n+1) + ...

--------------------------------------------------------------

Now if you used a notation like prefix (like LISP uses) or Postfix (like Postscript does), there would be no way to make it ambiguous. If you showed the expression as a parse tree, then it could not be ambiguous.

[Fpoonsie]

It is ambiguous; its meaning is determined from context. Like I said earlier in the thread, it's clear what expressions like these two mean from context, not from hard and fast rules that some 6th grade teacher told you:

∫ x dx = 1/2x^2 + C

1/2 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/20 + 1/30 + ... + 1/n(n+1) + ...

--------------------------------------------------------------

Now if you used a notation like prefix (like LISP uses) or Postfix (like Postscript does), there would be no way to make it ambiguous. If you showed the expression as a parse tree, then it could not be ambiguous.

:smchode:

[MannyIsGod]

Both interpretations are commonly seen in mathematical literature. The reason you're seeing different answers is because the problem is ambiguous; not because people are stupid.

Except its been explained time and time again in this thread and people STILL come in and say 2.

[ChuckD]

PEMDAS, done left to right. It's 288.

BTW, even if I didn't program for a living and understand the importance of order of operations, the fact that bb says 288 and Ashbeigh says 2 would automatically put me in the 288 camp.

[MannyIsGod]

PEMDAS, done left to right. It's 288.

BTW, even if I didn't program for a living and understand the importance of order of operations, the fact that bb says 288 and Ashbeigh says 2 would automatically put me in the 288 camp.

:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

Both interpretations are commonly seen in mathematical literature. The reason you're seeing different answers is because the problem is ambiguous; not because people are stupid.
No...

It's not ambiguous at all.

I wouldn't say stupid, but ignorant to the rules of math.

The jokes about "new math" in schools came from somewhere now, didn't they...

[baseline bum]

No...

It's not ambiguous at all.

I wouldn't say stupid, but ignorant to the rules of math.

The jokes about "new math" in schools came from somewhere now, didn't they...

You'll see both notations in top-notch books written 50-60 years ago too. Writing something like 1/(n(n+1)) in the sum I wrote above looks cumbersome, and is often just written 1/n(n+1) when the meaning is clear from context; especially in older texts written before TeX/LaTeX became the typesetting standard.

[ashbeeigh]

PEMDAS, done left to right. It's 288.

BTW, even if I didn't program for a living and understand the importance of order of operations, the fact that bb says 288 and Ashbeigh says 2 would automatically put me in the 288 camp.

Ha. Bastard. You can all go to hell.

I get why it's 288. And these types of problems are exactly why I do social work and not math for a living.

[MannyIsGod]

ha. Bastard. You can all go to hell.

I get why it's 288. And these types of problems are exactly why i do social work and not 6th grade math for a living.

fify

[Wild Cobra]

Chebyshev said it, and I'll say it again: there's always a prime between N and 2N.
Except when N<2.

[baseline bum]

Ha. Bastard. You can all go to hell.

I get why it's 288. And these types of problems are exactly why I do social work and not math for a living.

So what do people say when they get their county check and it's for $2 instead of $288?

[baseline bum]

Except when N<2.

No, it works for 1 too.

1 < 2 <= 2 = 2*1.

Of course, between is another ambiguous term, since it can mean
a < b < c
a <= b < c
a < b <= c
- or -
a <= b <= c. :lol

Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.

[Wild Cobra]

No, it works for 1 too.

1 < 2 <= 2 = 2*1.

Of course, between is another ambiguous term, since it can mean
a < b < c
a <= b < c
a < b <= c
- or -
a <= b <= c. :lol

Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.
No, between is not ambiguous either.

It cannot include the numbers it is between.

Only your first example applies of the four in sequence.

Tell me.

What prime number is between 1 and 2?

Is 2 between 1 and 2?

Is 1 between 1 and 2?

I think not.

I see they taught you "new math" in school.

Also, variables are not assumed to be positive, except in special circumstances. Talking about prime numbers, yes.

[baseline bum]

Wild Cobra, you don't know shit about math and you're just trying to be an argumentative hack.

[Wild Cobra]

Wild Cobra, you don't know shit about math and you're just trying to be an argumentative hack.
Well, I obviously know more than you do.

I've probably forgotten more than you know over the years.

There is nothing ambiguous about it. That's a dead giveaway that you don't understand it.

[baseline bum]

Well, I obviously know more than you do.

I've probably forgotten more than you know over the years.

So, you have forgotten boolean algebra, commutative algebra, noncommutative algebra, linear algebra, multilinear algebra, homological algebra, algebraic geometry, algebraic topology, differential geometry, euclidean geometry, non-euclidean geometry, real analysis, complex analysis, p-adic analysis, numerical analysis, functional analysis, analytic number theory, measure theory, probability, stochastic processes, and asymptotics?

[Kyle Orton]

PEMDAS, done left to right. It's 288.

BTW, even if I didn't program for a living and understand the importance of order of operations, the fact that bb says 288 and Ashbeigh says 2 would automatically put me in the 288 camp.
:lmao

[Kyle Orton]

And these types of problems are exactly why I do social work and not math for a living.
And because you're a fucking idiot.

[Wild Cobra]

So, you have forgotten boolean algebra, commutative algebra, noncommutative algebra, linear algebra, multilinear algebra, homological algebra, algebraic geometry, algebraic topology, differential geometry, euclidean geometry, non-euclidean geometry, real analysis, complex analysis, p-adic analysis, numerical analysis, functional analysis, analytic number theory, measure theory, probability, stochastic processes, and asymptotics?

Hey, It's been well over 30 years since I took a math course. I can assure you I have forgotten a great deal over that time. I never did take statistics though.

Still, the simple fact that you call the formula ambiguous is very laughable.

[Kyle Orton]

It's ambiguous mainly because / is used, and that can be interpreted as everything above / divided by everything below /, but people who pick 2 are still retarded.

[baseline bum]

Hey, It's been well over 30 years since I took a math course. I never did take statistics though.

Still, the simple fact that you call the formula ambiguous is very laughable.

The simple fact that you're such an uncultured hack whose knowledge of math usually boils down to plugging and chugging in formulas you don't understand is laughable.

[Wild Cobra]

The simple fact that you're such an uncultured hack whose knowledge of math usually boils down to plugging and chugging in formulas you don't understand is laughable.

say what ever you want.

If you studied all those areas, then You did go farther than I did. However, there was absolutely nothing ambiguous like you claim.

Yes, I do remember boolean math, vector math, and basic algebra. I have forgotten much of the higher maths, but did study them. Shit... That was like 1977 when I completed my last math class.

Boolean math is used in programing. Vector math, in AC mathematics for electronics. For the variable"i" for the imaginary number, "j" is used instead as not to confuse it with current.

[Wild Cobra]

The simple fact that you're such an uncultured hack...
If I have no culture, then I hate to imagine what you don't have...

[rmt]

PEMDAS
Multiplication and Division from left to right

48/2(9+3) =
48/2x12 =
24x12 =
288

[ChuckD]

Ha. Bastard. You can all go to hell.

I get why it's 288. And these types of problems are exactly why I do social work and not math for a living.

You might not want to jump out on that "You're wrong and a 6th grader would know it" branch and start sawing away next time. :lol Stick to shopping and The Hills.

[Kyle Orton]

BB, were you a math major? I ask because I'm one class away from finishing my math minor and the math counselor at UA I know is telling me I'd be stupid not to just double major in it.

[Greg Oden]

ashbeeigh should just stick to showing her jugs.


















































:vomit:

[Wild Cobra]

No, it works for 1 too.

1 < 2 <= 2 = 2*1.

Of course, between is another ambiguous term, since it can mean
a < b < c
a <= b < c
a < b <= c
- or -
a <= b <= c. :lol

Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.

Bertrand's postulate (actually a theorem) states that if n > 3 is an integer, then there always exists at least one prime number p with n < p < 2n − 2. A weaker but more elegant formulation is: for every n > 1 there is always at least one prime p such that n < p < 2n. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_postulate)

You claim to know more, but forget such simple things?

laughable...

[Wild Cobra]

It seems to me that Ashbeeigh is being targeted for no good reason.

[Greg Oden]

It seems to me that Ashbeeigh is being targeted for no good reason.

it seems to me that you're a faggot and we can meet up somewhere if you want to settle this outside of spurstalk.

[Wild Cobra]

it seems to me that you're a faggot and we can meet up somewhere if you want to settle this outside of spurstalk.
How many times must I tell you. You cannot such my dick. It gets enough attention by my lady.

[ChuckD]

It seems to me that Ashbeeigh is being targeted for no good reason.

You mean other than she had the wrong answer and called everyone else out on not having even 6th grade math knowledge?

[Greg Oden]

How many times must I tell you. You cannot such my dick. It gets enough attention by my lady.

lol bringing up sword fighting. is that kind of thing always on your mind? i'm sure you have enough fun with your fleshlight. now if you wanna talk some shit off the internet and stop typing keystrokes at me, we can see what's up.


faggot.

[Greg Oden]

You mean other than she had the wrong answer and called everyone else out on not having even 6th grade math knowledge?



:cry leave her alone, I love girls that have college cheese dangling off her appendages :cry

[Wild Cobra]

You mean other than she had the wrong answer and called everyone else out on not having even 6th grade math knowledge?
She brushed it off and acknowledged a mistake. Why attack someone who can admit such things?

[baseline bum]

Bertrand's postulate (actually a theorem) states that if n > 3 is an integer, then there always exists at least one prime number p with n < p < 2n − 2. A weaker but more elegant formulation is: for every n > 1 there is always at least one prime p such that n < p < 2n. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_postulate)

You claim to know more, but forget such simple things?

laughable...

LOL, so now Cobra Commander is a better mathematician than Erdos..

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/6614/bertrandg.png

[Wild Cobra]

LOL, so now Cobra Commander is a better mathematician than Erdos..

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/6614/bertrandg.png
So, we found two slightly different formulas. fact remains, 2 is not between 1 and 2. It is 2.

[Wild Cobra]

Just remember. You are quoting Nathan Fine. Not Bertrand, Chebyshev, or Erdos.

[baseline bum]

BB, were you a math major? I ask because I'm one class away from finishing my math minor and the math counselor at UA I know is telling me I'd be stupid not to just double major in it.

Yeah, math + CS. Are you interested in theory, or more applied stuff? You'll have to take at least two theory courses most likely: namely, analysis and algebra. If you enjoyed the epsilon-delta and big-N, epsilon arguments in calculus then you might like analysis; if not, you probably won't. Algebra is really cool because you learn some interesting applications like cryptography if you take an applied version of the course; the pure version will be a lot of learning the vocabulary of groups and rings in preparation for a second semester or graduate course. Other than those two courses though, stuff like ODE/PDE crops up all the time in physical systems, population modeling, finance, and the like. Game theory is really interesting if you're into econ. Numerical analysis is really cool since it teaches you how do calculus/ODE/PDE when you're given tables of data and not formulas, and you might study a bit about errors using computers due to problems like addition in hardware not being associative and the like.

If you're really interested in math, I'd say it might make sense to turn the minor into a major. If you're just looking for something to throw on a resume, it might be a waste of time.

[Kyle Orton]

Yeah, math + CS. Are you interested in theory, or more applied stuff? You'll have to take at least two theory courses most likely: namely, analysis and algebra. If you enjoyed the epsilon-delta and big-N, epsilon arguments in calculus then you might like analysis; if not, you probably won't. Algebra is really cool because you learn some interesting applications like cryptography if you take an applied version of the course; the pure version will be a lot of learning the vocabulary of groups and rings in preparation for a second semester or graduate course. Other than those two courses though, stuff like ODE/PDE crops up all the time in physical systems, population modeling, finance, and the like. Game theory is really interesting if you're into econ. Numerical analysis is really cool since it teaches you how do calculus/ODE/PDE when you're given tables of data and not formulas, and you might study a bit about errors using computers due to problems like addition in hardware not being associative and the like.

If you're really interested in math, I'd say it might make sense to turn the minor into a major. If you're just looking for something to throw on a resume, it might be a waste of time.

I wasn't entertaining it until recently since I never thought it was stuff I'd be using but then that changed the other day. My current plan is a double major in accounting/finance with the minor in math. Right now, I'm interning for a company owned by a hedge fund. The other day I met the hedge fund guy in charge of the company I work for, and he said any accounting or finance major with a math background can do extremely well with hedge funds, and me being a math minor gives me a huge edge when I try to intern with them not this coming summer but next.

The thing is, a triple major in accounting/finance/math is A LOT more school, and I don't really have the passion for math I did in high school or early on in college. I'm also not sure if the classes I'd have to take to go from a minor to a major will help at all with finance compared to the classes I've already taken.

[Wild Cobra]

Nathan Fine was referring to what Chebyshev said about the Bertrand postulate. Here are several references to that postulate:

Wolfram Mathworld: Bertrand's Postulate (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/BertrandsPostulate.html)

The Prime Glossary: Bertrand's postulate (http://primes.utm.edu/glossary/xpage/BertrandsPostulate.html)

University of Georgia: BERTRAND’S POSTULATE (http://www.math.uga.edu/~lyall/REU/Bertrand.pdf)

Erdo's proved a modified version of the original.

[Spurminator]

There are a total of 48 married people in a swingers group, and everyone in the group has a spouse who is also in the group. Each married couple gets 9 condoms and 3 dildos. How many total condoms and dildos are being passed out?

How would you write out that equation?

[Wild Cobra]

There are a total of 48 married people in a swingers group. Every person in the group has a spouse who is also in the group. Each married couple gets 9 condoms and 3 dildos. How many total condoms and dildos are being passed out?

How would you write out that equation?
Who would want to?

Just call the Angel's (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=45.497079,-122.622169&spn=0.001954,0.00257&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=45.496751,-122.622631&panoid=qlj_sdjBmcZCTxDniQWyiw&cbp=12,244.58,,1,7.63) club (used to be Ace of Hearts) here in Portland and ask someone there.

Never into the idea of a swingers club, know two couples who are. You lost me at dildos.

Maybe you should call the Egyptian club (http://portland.citysearch.com/profile/8454354/portland_or/egyptian_club.html?publisher=whitepages&placement=detail) instead. It's a lesbian club/restaurant.

[ChuckD]

Who would want to?

Just call the Angel's (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=45.497079,-122.622169&spn=0.001954,0.00257&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=45.496751,-122.622631&panoid=qlj_sdjBmcZCTxDniQWyiw&cbp=12,244.58,,1,7.63) club (used to be Ace of Hearts) here in Portland and ask someone there.

Never into the idea of a swingers club, know two couples who are. You lost me at dildos.

Maybe you should call the Egyptian club (http://portland.citysearch.com/profile/8454354/portland_or/egyptian_club.html?publisher=whitepages&placement=detail) instead. It's a lesbian club/restaurant.

That whooshing sound was his unambiguous re-statement of the problem in the subject line going RIGHT over your head...

[Wild Cobra]

That whooshing sound was his unambiguous re-statement of the problem in the subject line going RIGHT over your head...
It didn't go over my heard, and is a simple problem to solve. I just thought I would respond with places he might like.

Now I've been to the Egyptian club a few time with a girlfriend. I like bisexual women.

[baseline bum]

I wasn't entertaining it until recently since I never thought it was stuff I'd be using but then that changed the other day. My current plan is a double major in accounting/finance with the minor in math. Right now, I'm interning for a company owned by a hedge fund. The other day I met the hedge fund guy in charge of the company I work for, and he said any accounting or finance major with a math background can do extremely well with hedge funds, and me being a math minor gives me a huge edge when I try to intern with them not this coming summer but next.

The thing is, a triple major in accounting/finance/math is A LOT more school, and I don't really have the passion for math I did in high school or early on in college. I'm also not sure if the classes I'd have to take to go from a minor to a major will help at all with finance compared to the classes I've already taken.

Damn, a triple major is crazy, but he's obviously a much better resource to listen to than I could be. An analysis course that does measure theory (e.g., first semester grad real analysis or 2nd semester honors undergrad mathematical analysis) could be useful for applications to probability. Still, I'd just ask him point blank what courses to take.

[Jt.ONE]

288 fwiw

the people who got 2 i assumed did

9+3=12
12*2=24
48/24=2

^ not pemdas

[The Reckoning]

the mathematical equation is so fucked up, it's like writing "i went to the bouncer asking for directions."

the sentence could be interpreted as myself or the bouncer who needs direction.
get your parentheses right.

yes and id interpret the answer as 288, but i failed math so whatever.

oh and dont triple major. double majoring is already a bitch. if i went back and started over, id pick one solid major and that's it. everything else can be learned in grad school...

[Uriel]

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/5796/unled1fl.jpg

[Sense]

Wow if Spurstalk has a "one upper" it's definitely Wild Cobra...

[Nbadan]

it's 288.....and I am a math major....so is BB...

[Nbadan]

.....by the way, I hope to write a book on teaching PEMDAS someday......

[Wild Cobra]

Wow if Spurstalk has a "one upper" it's definitely Wild Cobra...
It's just too easy to do with some people.

[ChuckD]

It's just too easy to do with some people.

One upping has nothing to do with having more knowledge or information than other people, and everything to do with insecurity. You literally can't let someone respond to you without responding back, whether it be correct information, bullshit info, or banality.

[Wild Cobra]

One upping has nothing to do with having more knowledge or information than other people, and everything to do with insecurity. You literally can't let someone respond to you without responding back, whether it be correct information, bullshit info, or banality.
That's not true. I completely ignore some people. I don't respond to everything. Then there are a few chosen ones that have placed themselves in the unique position of being ones I do like to taunt. Baseless bum just happens to be one I like to taunt. When I saw the quote in his signature, I had to correct it. I was amazed he kept giving incorrect information to the origin of the quote. I decided to have fun with Sperminator's question. Figured I would see if someone else tried to make it more complex that it was.

As for insecurity? I'm not. I do allow myself to vent here though rather than the people i know personally. There are three people I deal with at work who I simply cannot stand. The longer I am in proximity with them, the more I need to vent, one way or another.

[IronMaxipad]

Holy shit 5 pages? :wow :lol

[BlackSwordsMan]

I got 45

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Should h+ave been written as:

(48/2)*(9+3) = 24*12 = 288

[baseline bum]

That's not true. I completely ignore some people. I don't respond to everything. Then there are a few chosen ones that have placed themselves in the unique position of being ones I do like to taunt. Baseless bum just happens to be one I like to taunt. When I saw the quote in his signature, I had to correct it. I was amazed he kept giving incorrect information to the origin of the quote. I decided to have fun with Sperminator's question. Figured I would see if someone else tried to make it more complex that it was.

As for insecurity? I'm not. I do allow myself to vent here though rather than the people i know personally. There are three people I deal with at work who I simply cannot stand. The longer I am in proximity with them, the more I need to vent, one way or another.

The quote is correct. What incorrect information did I give? It was a (very) short poem in response to Erdos finding an elementary proof of Bertrand's Postulate. I'm amazed that even you would nitpick over two completely equivalent instantiations of the theorem. You're like a 12 year-old.

[mingus]

That's not true. I completely ignore some people. I don't respond to everything. Then there are a few chosen ones that have placed themselves in the unique position of being ones I do like to taunt. Baseless bum just happens to be one I like to taunt. When I saw the quote in his signature, I had to correct it. I was amazed he kept giving incorrect information to the origin of the quote. I decided to have fun with Sperminator's question. Figured I would see if someone else tried to make it more complex that it was.

As for insecurity? I'm not. I do allow myself to vent here though rather than the people i know personally. There are three people I deal with at work who I simply cannot stand. The longer I am in proximity with them, the more I need to vent, one way or another.

yeah, you are, clearly. i've encountered enough insecure people in my life to know one when i see one. i don't know if you're short or not, but you clearly have little man syndrome.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The quote is correct. What incorrect information did I give? It was a (very) short poem in response to Erdos finding an elementary proof of Bertrand's Postulate. I'm amazed that even you would nitpick over two completely equivalent instantiations of the theorem. You're like a 12 year-old.

No, he just reads a wiki page and think hes got all the tools to talk on any discipline. If you call it on him in a way he cannot weasel out of and do not let it go then he will put you on ignore and then read another wiki page.

[Wild Cobra]

yeah, you are, clearly. i've encountered enough insecure people in my life to know one when i see one. i don't know if you're short or not, but you clearly have little man syndrome.
LOL...

That fits one of the people at work I dislike.

What do you consider your actions?

Ever think I just like to taunt jackasses?

[Wild Cobra]

The quote is correct. What incorrect information did I give? It was a (very) short poem in response to Erdos finding an elementary proof of Bertrand's Postulate. I'm amazed that even you would nitpick over two completely equivalent instantiations of the theorem. You're like a 12 year-old.
I simply pointed out from the Nathan Fine quote in your sig needed it stated that N>1. You disagreed, referring to Erdo's findings which were a revision of Bertrand's. However, your idea of between and mine are in conflict. I proved my point when it came to the postulate, and you didn't. Remember when I said "Just remember. You are quoting Nathan Fine. Not Bertrand, Chebyshev, or Erdos?" You accuse me of knowing better than Erdos, when I never implied any such thing.

What's the problem? Take your time, review the thread. You will see I was never wrong.

[baseline bum]

Actually, I have no idea why I was amazed your nitpicking; I should know better by now.

[Wild Cobra]

Actually, I have no idea why I was amazed your nitpicking; I should know better by now.
I corrected the quote, and you nitpicked.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I simply pointed out from the Nathan Fine quote in your sig needed it stated that N>1. You disagreed, referring to Erdo's findings which were a revision of Bertrand's. However, your idea of between and mine are in conflict. I proved my point when it came to the postulate, and you didn't. Remember when I said "Just remember. You are quoting Nathan Fine. Not Bertrand, Chebyshev, or Erdos?" You accuse me of knowing better than Erdos, when I never implied any such thing.

What's the problem? Take your time, review the thread. You will see I was never wrong.

Double checked the wiki page I see.

[baseline bum]

I corrected the quote, and you nitpicked.

You should stick with shooting Mexicans at the border.

[Wild Cobra]

You should stick with shooting Mexicans at the border.
LOL...

Changing the subject huh...

[baseline bum]

LOL...

Changing the subject huh...

Might as well when you're a brick wall on any reasonable subject.

[MannyIsGod]

Wild Cobra argues with more professionals in their own field than anyone I've ever seen. Its amazing.

[Kai]

division and multiplication are of the same rank, so you just go left from right. PEMDAS is misleading. 288 bitches.

I agree with BB about postfix fixing this all:

48 2 / 9 3 + *= 288

[Nbadan]

....I believe its simply the linear function f (x) = 24(x) with g(x) = (9 + 3)....

its an odd function with x and y intercepts at (0,0)...

[jaffies]

Duncan288

[FuzzyLumpkins]

....I believe its simply the linear function f (x) = 24(x) with g(x) = (9 + 3)....

its an odd function with x and y intercepts at (0,0)...

There are no variables given.

[The Reckoning]

this thread should have only had three responses max.

the wrong answer, the right answer, and why the right answer is right.

it should not have gotten this far.

[Agloco]

Wild Cobra argues with more professionals in their own field than anyone I've ever seen. Its amazing.

This.

On a side note, I can't believe that this thread is over 130 replies and counting. I'm actually kinda scared to see what responses I'd get if asked around. Mebbe I'll start with the physicians and go from there. :lol

[lefty]

288

[Phineas J. Whoopee]

Interesting thread.

[Wild Cobra]

Wild Cobra argues with more professionals in their own field than anyone I've ever seen. Its amazing.

Which experts have I argued with, as in a disagreement, that wasn't just a misunderstanding?

Yes, I am occasionally wrong, but example please.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

Really? Pick your choice of threads in the political forum. Off the top off my head I can think of you arguing with El Nono, Baseline Bum, From Way Downtown, Agloco, and Fuzzy Lumpkins. All about THEIR fields. Its amazing.

[Wild Cobra]

:lmao

Really? Pick your choice of threads in the political forum. Off the top off my head I can think of you arguing with El Nono, Baseline Bum, From Way Downtown, Agloco, and Fuzzy Lumpkins. All about THEIR fields. Its amazing.
Of those you have selected, I have been wrong with El Nono several times. I don't recall arguing with Agloco, I agree with him. We had some clarifications that I see as just misunderstandings.

Am I wrong Agloco about this with you?

Are you claiming Fuzzy is right and I'm wrong about electronics? No F'n way. The one exception is not realizing how much they have reduced the size of farad range rated capacitors. As for the theory... Fuzzy ain't got shit on me.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Which experts have I argued with, as in a disagreement, that wasn't just a misunderstanding?

Yes, I am occasionally wrong, but example please.

Electromagnetics. Capacitors. Field theory. Wave propogation. Pretty much all calculus beyond simple limit theorems. Series versus parallel circuits. The function of a flywheel. Rotational motion in general. Power.

But hey you can show graphs and pie charts off of wikipedia!!!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Of those you have selected, I have been wrong with El Nono several times. I don't recall arguing with Agloco, I agree with him. We had some clarifications that I see as just misunderstandings.

Am I wrong Agloco about this with you?

Are you claiming Fuzzy is right and I'm wrong about electronics? No F'n way. The one exception is not realizing how much they have reduced the size of farad range rated capacitors. As for the theory... Fuzzy ain't got shit on me.

Reduced the size of capacitors. Hers a hint dipshit: pico is of the order of -12. farad is of the order of 0.

-12 < 0. Ie 0 is bigger you fucking dolt.

[Wild Cobra]

Reduced the size of capacitors. Hers a hint dipshit: pico is of the order of -12. farad is of the order of 0.

-12 < 0. Ie 0 is bigger you fucking dolt.
Duh...

Problem is, you think you are saying things I don't know.

[MannyIsGod]

I love to watch Fuzzy take WC to the woodshed. Here's to hoping another verbal beat down ensues.

[Wild Cobra]

I love to watch Fuzzy take WC to the woodshed. Here's to hoping another verbal beat down ensues.

He never has.

Link please.

[LnGrrrR]

Wild Cobra argues with more professionals in their own field than anyone I've ever seen. Its amazing.

I enjoyed him arguing that the military would get paid if a shutdown occurred, in spite of the SecDef saying that troops would not be paid, the multiple news articles listing that outcome in details, and my own personal anecdotes handed down from my military leadership. :lol

[LnGrrrR]

:lmao

Really? Pick your choice of threads in the political forum. Off the top off my head I can think of you arguing with El Nono, Baseline Bum, From Way Downtown, Agloco, and Fuzzy Lumpkins. All about THEIR fields. Its amazing.

ElNono - WC has disputed some of the IT stuff ElNono has listed
Agloco - Nuclear radiation
FWDT - Legal theory
Fuzzy Lumpkins - Electronics
BB - Math

I'm sure there's more.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Duh...

Problem is, you think you are saying things I don't know.

Obviously, when you claim that the size of capacitors has decreased you really meant that they increased.

As i told you then they have always been able to make large capacitance circuit elements because of how they work in parallel so its not a new development. Farraday understood it back in the mid to late 18th century.

You just do not know shit about the theory behind it and you do not change those parts. You have a very myopic grasp because your knowledge is limited to ITT and the devices you work on.

Everyone sees right through you, parts changer. Everyone knows your MO. Making bullshit evasive statements like the above mitigates that not in the least.

[Nbadan]

There are no variables given.

...just thinking abstract...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

...just thinking abstract...

I know what you are getting at but I just do not see the a*x+b form.

Sorry if I seem adversarial or the like. In a weird mood lately.

[Wild Cobra]

I enjoyed him arguing that the military would get paid if a shutdown occurred, in spite of the SecDef saying that troops would not be paid, the multiple news articles listing that outcome in details, and my own personal anecdotes handed down from my military leadership. :lol
And I am wrong at times, and linked the appropriate material that showed I was wrong. Didn't I?

I still have a hard time believing that could happen though.

[Wild Cobra]

Obviously, when you claim that the size of capacitors has decreased you really meant that they increased.

Please put you assumptions on hold and recall that original bout with capacity. I was speaking of physical size decreasing for farad size capacitors.


As i told you then they have always been able to make large capacitance circuit elements because of how they work in parallel so its not a new development. Farraday understood it back in the mid to late 18th century.

That's not what the discussion was about, and I was always well aware of that since the 70's. You however would not acknowledge capacitance decreased when you put enough in series for higher voltage purposes, as the farad size rated capacitors are all low voltage.


You just do not know shit about the theory behind it and you do not change those parts. You have a very myopic grasp because your knowledge is limited to ITT and the devices you work on.

Believe as you wish. I don't care if yo limit yourself inside that box.


Everyone sees right through you, parts changer.
Knowing how to troubleshoot analog and digital electronics to the component level makes me a "parts changer." I can live with that.

Everyone knows your MO. Making bullshit evasive statements like the above mitigates that not in the least.

Sorry you are incapable of understanding. Not my problem.

[MannyIsGod]

And I am wrong at times, and linked the appropriate material that showed I was wrong. Didn't I?

I still have a hard time believing that could happen though.

No. You didn't. You simply buried your head in the sand like you always do. Who are you trying to fool? We were there. The threads are still there.

[Wild Cobra]

No. You didn't. You simply buried your head in the sand like you always do.
I was specifically referring to the military shut down in this case. As for burying my head... You are wrong again. LnGrrrR and others kept insisting i was wrong. I did some searching, and linked the material that showed I was wrong. Go to to post #131 of here (http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176284).

I'm not as hard headed as you make me out to be. You just have to convince me you are right. Not many of you show me material that changes my mind, especially on topics like Anthropogenic Global Warming.

We were there. The threads are still there.
Then link the threads, and quote the relevant material to prove your case.

If it's as bad as you suggest, start a new thread please. Maybe titled "Wild Cobra's Fuck-Ups."

Damn...

If it's really bad, you may ask to start a new forum...

[MannyIsGod]

You're not that important and besides, everyone already knows it. You can see the responses above if you don't understand that your reputation precedes you by a mile.

[LnGrrrR]

And I am wrong at times, and linked the appropriate material that showed I was wrong. Didn't I?

I still have a hard time believing that could happen though.

You admitted it, but it sure took you awhile :lol

[Agloco]

Of those you have selected, I have been wrong with El Nono several times. I don't recall arguing with Agloco, I agree with him. We had some clarifications that I see as just misunderstandings.

Am I wrong Agloco about this with you?

I didn't get the idea that you were being oppositional. It's clear that others did though.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

WC is going to the line by line.

What a toolbag.

[DarkReign]

Holy shit 5 pages? :wow :lol

That is exactly what I came to post. Only 7 pages.

[Wild Cobra]

You admitted it, but it sure took you awhile :lol
But at least when I agree someone showed me wrong, I do.

[LnGrrrR]

But at least when I agree someone showed me wrong, I do.

Yes. It just takes an exceedingly high amount of data to get you to change your stance. :D

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Please put you assumptions on hold and recall that original bout with capacity. I was speaking of physical size decreasing for farad size capacitors.

That's not what the discussion was about, and I was always well aware of that since the 70's. You however would not acknowledge capacitance decreased when you put enough in series for higher voltage purposes, as the farad size rated capacitors are all low voltage.

Believe as you wish. I don't care if yo limit yourself inside that box.

Knowing how to troubleshoot analog and digital electronics to the component level makes me a "parts changer." I can live with that.

Sorry you are incapable of understanding. Not my problem.

I have decided to not let this go.

The original discussion of capacitors with me was about you not knowing that they went up to ratings above 1 farad and asked for a link.

I put '1F capacitor' into google and the first page had about 100 of them.

I then had to explain to you that it is easy tocreate that capcitance and has been since the concept was first invented because of how they operated in parallel, ie they were additive.

Obviously at that point you went to wiki and started talking about higher voltage uses of plates in series. Again I pointed out your fucking ignorance because of how charge cascades and even in very accurate rated parts there was still a difference in capacitance and if you kept a large drop across them for any perod of time they would explode on you.

As for the improvement in the dialectrics over the last 50 years that is completely moot. The size of the capacitor has never been a limiting factor in the ability to design large capacitance parts. I first experienced those ratings back in the 80s when my brother was building his car stereos.

The only real applications for that are in certain cathodes like very high powered lasers. You would not know that because you change parts in an industrial complex in Washington state. Stick to your starters and simple regulators.

Furthermore I know exactly what the requirements for a masters license are and I doubt you even have one of those. I know exactly what the limits of your knowledge are because I have hired your equivalent many a time.

You're a fucking glorified service technician, a parts changer.

When we spoke before you flat out said that you had memorized the troubleshooting checklists long ago. Being able to take drops ad the amp draws to know what circuit board or analog part to change because you memorized said checklist does not make you understand shit.

All you do is read a wiki page and then resort to sophistry just trying to throw charts and whatever verbage you think makes sense or is a good red herring.

As i have said before, everyone see through your transparent nonsense.

[Wild Cobra]

Fuzzy, you're a loser. You think you were telling me things I didn't know. The only think I didn't know was the fact that the physical size was decreased so much. That is the only thing you schooled me on, so give it a break loser.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy, you're a loser. You think you were telling me things I didn't know. The only think I didn't know was the fact that the physical size was decreased so much. That is the only thing you schooled me on, so give it a break loser.

Loser?

Thats the best that you can do, parts changer?

Fact: you did not know that there were capacitors rated 1F.

Fact: Improvements in dialectrics have no bearing on being able to make high F rated capacitors.

Fact: Capacitors in series have no bearing on being able to make larger F caps.

Fact: you did not know how charges cascade in actual applications of caps in series.

Fact: you are a technician whose job is to change parts according to a troubleshooting checklist.

You know them now because I educated your ignorant ass. Before i did so you were making dimwit statements about using caps in series and asking for links of 1F caps.

It was pretty obvious that when i was telling you about parallel caps that you went to a wiki page or your ITT textbook to look up the formulas because you came back with the topic that is always included in those texts.

It had no bearing on the discussion and it was obvious that you had no idea of the application. Its one of the first things they teach you in circuit design in being careful with caps because they can be dangerous.

That showed loud and clear that you do not know the theory behind the machines you work on. if you did, you would not have made ignorant statements like the above.

Go ahead and claim, 'I already knew that' when its been pointed out in what you have actually said and claimed that you in fact did not know that.

You are a sophist but worse you are a sophist that tries to learn the topics of your sophistry as you go. I have nothing but contempt for you and your methods.

[ashbeeigh]

288.

[ChuckD]

288.

...at the speed of blonde!!! :lol

[Cant_Be_Faded]

This exact same thread was on some other message boards I follow, and each time, when "288" people explained why "2" people were wrong, "2" people kept saying the answer has to be 2, and the thread went 8+ pages.

[ashbeeigh]

...at the speed of blonde!!! :lol

:lmao I think it was like page 3 where I said I was sorry for my genes. Please accept my apologies again, ChuckD.

[Bito Corleone]

Should look like this instead:

48
2(9+3)


That makes order of operation simple.
This

[Wild Cobra]

Fuzzy, no matter what you say, your only truthful point was I didn't know they miniaturized a 1 farad capacitor so small. You cannot show quotes otherwise, so give it a rest. You're just proving yourself to be a relentless ass. That's why I had you on IGNORE till recently also. Maybe I should box you again?

[IronMaxipad]

This exact same thread was on some other message boards I follow, and each time, when "288" people explained why "2" people were wrong, "2" people kept saying the answer has to be 2, and the thread went 8+ pages.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=426785

61 pages 3,000+ posts and it's still going.. :lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy, no matter what you say, your only truthful point was I didn't know they miniaturized a 1 farad capacitor so small. You cannot show quotes otherwise, so give it a rest. You're just proving yourself to be a relentless ass. That's why I had you on IGNORE till recently also. Maybe I should box you again?


I was saying wind mills did not store rotational power like a Rotary UPS does. You misunderstood.

As for the rest of your dribble...

Show me a capacitor rated in farads. They are generally rated in micro-farads and below.

You show yourself unknowledgeable again. You make too many foolish assumptions.

As for voltage, 120/240 is nominal. It varies somewhat. How many times you going to expose your ass?

Here is you not knowing about higher rated caps. this statement says nothing about size. And again as i pointed out then it does not matter. I started doing that here:


Bullshit, if you want a larger capacitance you just add plates in parallel.

And of course you did not think I would find it. You did not know they existed because they are not a part you change in the machines you work on.


OK smartypants.

Show me a 300,000 Volt 1 farad capacitor.

Remember, you have to put capacitors in series to increase the voltage. Series capacitors decrease their capacitance. Therefor, if you have to put in series 10,000 capacitors to have a 300,000 volt breakdown voltage, then you have to also have 10,000 of these strings in parallel to maintain the capacitance. That's a total of 100,000,000 capacitors at 1 farad each, or 100,000 of them if they are 1,000 farad capacitors. Another problem, i think this design stops at 3 volts breakdown. Not 30.

Here is when you start on cps in series. As i pointed out then it has no bearing on whether or not you can make high cap caps.


http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/science/seriescapacitors-edit.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor)

Here is a direct example of you getting your info from wiki.


The last rotary UPS I worked on used a 6 cylinder turbocharged diesel engine that sat idle with the glow plugs always hot. It had an electric clutch that the incoming power held disengaged. The next component was a massive flywheel. I don't know the weight, but by the size, I will guess it weighted about 17,000 pounds or so. My recollection of its size and material calculates to 17,675 lbs, but I could be wrong. After this, there was a 55 KW motor, driven from the incoming commercial AC. Then, the 45 KW alternator, supplying our communications equipment with power, at the Antenna Farm. When the power is lost, the flywheel engages, and the IC engine fires up right away. Seamless... No loss of site equipment power and no power spikes. Now the lights would go out, and the 150 KW generator would take a few seconds to engage.

Yes, I know. Why a 150 KW generator system...

We had huge air-conditioning to keep the equipment cool! We didn't need much for lights, etc, but the equipment would burn up otherwise.

Anyway, any flywheel that windmills may have is to keep sudden changes in speed from occurring. Not to store power.

I forgot about the flywheel. Its funny that your mind could not reconcile that a flywheel was storing energy as it regulated rotation. the entire idea is to tap that stored energy when the angular velocity dips.

It was almsot as funny as you never getting that I never said there was a flywheel in a windmill.

You did not even know the principles of what you thought i was talking about.

This is also where you talk about where your ITT ass works.

Or am i wrong and they finally fired your inept ass?

And you go ahead and put me back on ignore. If you have noticed i still respond to your posts. I do not have to wade through your nonsense in pointing out your ignorant sophistry that way.

Thats what its about to me. Exposing you for what you are to everyone else. Youre middle aged and stupid. I do not expect you to change but at least I can make sure you are put in the proper context for everyone else.

There are your links now go fuck yourself.

[DMC]

WC, what is your background in electronics? Nothing specific, just general experience.

[LnGrrrR]

WC, what is your background in electronics/legal theory/economics/metereology/information technology? Nothing specific, just general experience.

Fify

[Cant_Be_Faded]

lol at SpursTalk still being surprised an old neocon thinks he knows everything about everything

[Wild Cobra]

WC, what is your background in electronics? Nothing specific, just general experience.

I started studying electronics in 1968, maybe 1967. I used to do component level troubleshooting and repairs on analog and digital multiplexers and radios. I haven't done any formal studying on the topic since the early 80's, but the theory doesn't change.

[Wild Cobra]

lol at SpursTalk still being surprised an old neocon thinks he knows everything about everything
1. I am not a neocon. I am a conservative libertarian.

2. Electronics and other technical things are what I do understand better than others, and electronics was my first professional endeavor. I will concede I know less about the politics, legal, etc.

[4down]

>1 . Where my cookie at?

[Wild Cobra]

Fuzzy, you should quite while you are behind so you stop slipping backwards. I'm sorry you don't understand what you quoted.

[MannyIsGod]

Fuzzy, you should quite while you are behind so you stop slipping backwards. I'm sorry you don't understand what you quoted.

You're the only one that thinks he's behind.

[The Reckoning]

48÷(2(9+3))

or

(48÷2)(9+3)

[The Reckoning]

btw ironmaxipad needs to get some original material soon or gtfo

[Wild Cobra]

You're the only one that thinks he's behind.
Show me then what I said wrong in what he quoted. I suggest you go back and look at the context first.

[IronMaxipad]

btw ironmaxipad needs to get some original material soon or gtfo

Come at me harder bro

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Show me then what I said wrong in what he quoted. I suggest you go back and look at the context first.

Yup you are fucking stupid. you asked for quotes to back up what i said. I did.

Now you are trying to backtrack again.

You got owned because your ignorant ass does not understand how capacitors work nor what ratings are available so you started posting nonsense from wiki to make it seem as if you know what you are talking about.

Thats everything to you: to LOOK like you know what youa re talking about. Your a contemptible sophist.

I have you quoted being incredulous about 1F caps, I have you posting about caps in series and you quoting directly from wiki. IOW I supported my case.

Then there was this:


any flywheel that windmills may have is to keep sudden changes in speed from occurring. Not to store power.

You may recall this:


A flywheel is a mechanical device with a significant moment of inertia used as a storage device for rotational energy.

But hey if you keep claiming that you were never wrong then maybe someone will believe its true.

You are right. i am relentless when dealing with people like you. I will continue to rub your face in it as long as you continue with your pathetic schtick.

You can put me on ignore and i will still continue because it is important to me for everyone to understadn how dishonorable and disingenuous you are. What you think is immaterial to me. You are too stupid and old for it to make a difference.

[Wild Cobra]

Fuzzy, you should give it a break. Those quotes don't prove anything wrong in what I said. I do understand how capacitors work in series and parallel. You never showed otherwise. Nothing wrong about my other quotes except when I initially mentioned flywheels, I thought you were saying the opposite than what you did.

As for you being adamant the US voltage is 110/220 when I said 120/240, sometime in the 50's they adopted the 120/240 standard. Consider this:

wiki: Split-phase electric power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-phase_electric_power)

It's so laughable that you kept trying to say I was wrong about things I didn't say, along with saying I was wrong about those I did. Assume all you want. I'll let you keep arguing against things I never said. I think I know how Obama feels, letting the Birther's making fools of themselves saying he doesn't have a US birth certificate. I'll continue to laugh at your stupidity instead of showing you how wrong you are.

Unless you have something to say that surprises me, I'm done with this topic in this thread and will laugh at your words in silence.

[Gutter92]

wow what the fuck i only read pages 1 and 8, and somehow from this math problem we got to windmills and where they store their energy???

by page 15 we'll have people claiming that Michael Jackson actually molested those kids :lmao

[FuzzyLumpkins]

When I said that putting plates in parallel it would allow an increase in capacitance you immediately came up with the comment on how they work in series and graphics straight from wikipedia.

It is obvious that any time there is a discussion on something you go to wikipedia and try to twist what is written there to suit your bigotry.

Its obvious as you do that every time. Discussions on thermal patterns, economics or electronics and your behavior each time is the same.

You come back with a halfassed knowledge and spout bullshit.

CAPACITORS IN SERIES HAVE NO BEARING ON BEING ABLE TO MAKE CAPACITORS WITH HIGHER FARAD RATINGS.

You might as well have talked about mutual inductance for as much bearing as it had on the discussion at hand.

This is the way the conversation went:

You: They do not rate caps in single farads.

Me: Google link of '1F Caps' its been easy to make them for pretty much ever because of how they work in parallel.

You: Well if you put them in series, you can use higher voltages.

Its obvious what you were doing. You got told so you went to wiki to try and learn and did it poorly.

Its what you always do.

Anyone whoever has had a discussion with you points it out.

As for what you not saying certain things, I have the quotes that show you a bald faced liar. Old, stupid and dishonorable. You bring shame upon your family.

Go ahead an laugh, i will just point people to the post with the quotes you made from yesterday.