Reply With Quote
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...
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 bersome, 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.
Ha. Bas . You can all go to .
I get why it's 288. And these types of problems are exactly why I do social work and not math for a living.
Except when N<2.
So what do people say when they get their county check and it's for $2 instead of $288?
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.
Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.
No, between is not ambiguous either.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.
Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.
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 cir stances. Talking about prime numbers, yes.
Wild Cobra, you don't know 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.
So, you have forgotten boolean algebra, commutative algebra, noncommutative algebra, linear algebra, multilinear algebra, logical 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?
And because you're a ing idiot.
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.
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 re ed.
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. ... 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.
If I have no culture, then I hate to imagine what you don't have...
PEMDAS
Multiplication and Division from left to right
48/2(9+3) =
48/2x12 =
24x12 =
288
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.Stick to shopping and The Hills.
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.
ashbeeigh should just stick to showing her jugs.
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.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.
Plus, N is a letter that has been typecast to be a positive integer in math literature.
You claim to know more, but forget such simple things?
laughable...
It seems to me that Ashbeeigh is being targeted for no good reason.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions