mersenneforum.org Simple Arithmetic!
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2007-04-24, 10:26   #34
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

22×33×19 Posts
crank score ?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Orgasmic Troll Anybody want to compute the crank score?

I promised the solution tomorrow and its come as today. However the appointed time has not come as yet since I posted so I've decided to spar with all who commented to while away the time.

Your post reminds me of the Biblical story of the woman caught in adultery when the penalty was death by stoning.

"Let him without sin cast the first stone. And they all walked away beginning with the eldest"

So you may start the score Travis (if Im not mistaken its you)

Mally

2007-04-24, 10:32   #35
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

22·33·19 Posts
The beast.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wacky I'm sorry, Mike took that number as the User ID for XYZZY.

I'm not with the Beast but against him.

With a stroke of luck I may be in an undisclosed part of Texas. I will let you know if this comes true .

Mally

2007-04-24, 10:35   #36
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

80416 Posts
Tex!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by michaf Of course, this wil lonly apply to kindergarten math :> I just presumed everybody had the knowledge that MY knowledge didn't reach any further At least my TeX did work out al right :)
It certainly did. You did alright

Mally

2007-04-24, 11:14   #37
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

40048 Posts
snipes!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ewmayer Surely the bible contains the answer to your question, Mally - why consult with us lowly guttersnipes? (Hint: it's probably next to the Pi = 10/3 psalm). Failing that, you could always consult the Q'uran, like you did in your recent work on relativity theory.

Well dear old Ernst cheer up my friend. We are all children of God and equal.

Even the guttersnipe. On its own its a beautiful creature but its environment is bad. I have tried flying shots with spread shot with them but missed every time. We In India unlike America can take pot land shots but I could never spot them.

I am happy I roped in two of the three top dogs(no insult intended) but where is the third? He is wise to refrain from comment. He knows when old Mally boy bowls a googly (to the non cricketers its an unpredictable ball) he doesn't swipe at it to hit a six (over the fence)!

Ernst much learning has thrown you off balance! It would be better if you got back on the faculty at Chase. That would be a better environment.

Oh yes the psalm ,I think I gave a link explaining it but no matter never mind

Regards the Quran it was given by the angel Gabriel but misinterpreted by the Scribes as their Prophet was illiterate but with a phenomenal memory.
Don't smart over it though.

However I dont like to see a lion in the company of jackals!

Its all in good natured fun so please dont take it to heart

Mally

2007-04-24, 11:53   #38
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

22·33·19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by davieddy That was Jack Nicholson in "Five Easy Pieces"

And so that leaves you eddy my unfailing critic.

Jack Nicholson reminds me of my one time neighbour who always quarrelled with me as he wanted his daughter, who was slightly kinky, to marry my beloved younger son. Well I put my foot down and he can never forgive me as she is still a spinster.

Yeah Shakespeare says "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace, from day to day, untill the last syllable of recorded time"

And Vivien Leigh (or was it Clarke Gable?) sums up 'Gone with the wind' with "Tomorrow is another day"

Mally

Last fiddled with by mfgoode on 2007-04-24 at 12:15 Reason: Add on

2007-04-24, 16:52   #39
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

22×33×19 Posts
The Final Solution!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Orgasmic Troll so you're claiming that $(2)( \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}) = \sqrt{(2) (\frac{2}{3})}$? $(2)( \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}) = \sqrt{(4) (\frac{2}{3})} \neq \sqrt{(2) (\frac{2}{3})}$
Im using this post for it is in Tex for clarity.

Consider the fractions UNDER THE ROOT SIGN.

Let x denote multiplication.

L.H.S. is 2/3 and this is a 'proper fraction'.

When we put 2 from outside the root it becomes 4 when transposed under the root. Fair enough!

But it is *wrong* to think that 4 2/3 (read 4 and two by 3 where 'by' means divided by)
is a 'mixed fraction'

It is actually 4x(2/3) =8/3 which is an 'improper fraction'. NOT (14/3)

So L.H.S. is 8/3 under root.

Now take the R.H.S. under root.

2 2/3 read (two and two by3) IS a 'mixed fraction'. Its value is therefore
(3x2 + 2)/3 =8/3

Hence R.H.S. is 8/3 under root. = L.H.S. = 8/3
Q.E.D.
Thus the equation is correct.

Definition of terms used:

'proper fraction' where numerator < denominator

'Improper fraction' where numerator > denominator

'mixed fraction' is an integer with a proper fraction like 1and 1/2. Its value is 3/2.

I trust this is clear and simple enough!

Mally

2007-04-24, 17:12   #40
DJones

Oct 2006

73 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mfgoode Now take the R.H.S. under root. 2 2/3 read (two and two by3) IS a 'mixed fraction'. Its value is therefore (3x2 + 2)/3 =8/3
Just one problem with your so-called solution. Your original post stated, and I quote;

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mfgoode Is this equation correct ? 2.*sq.rt (2/3) = sq.rt. [2*(2/3)] ? Yes or No ?
...where the part under the root symbol on the right-hand side is NOT, as you claim, 2 and two-thirds, but rather 2 multiplied by two-thirds. Once again you have managed to mess up a puzzle by being inconsistent. You have done this so many times that I would not consider it to be a harsh judgement if people decided that you do this kind of thing deliberately so that you can then massage your ego with the false belief that you must be more mathematically-skilled than everyone else as we continually fail to solve your problems. A judgement which is only further supported by the fact that when people point out your errors to you, you claim they are ignorant or just upset that they couldn't solve it or both. That's not even mentioning your childish implications of stupidity when you tell them that they should go back to school in order to attain your supposed "high level" of mathematical capability.
The way I see it you have three sensible options;
1. Stop posting "problems"
2. Learn how to write a problem in a clear and accurate fashion
3. Learn to accept when you've made a mistake, and thereby rendered the "problem" nonsensical

 2007-04-24, 17:16 #41 BlisteringSheep     Oct 2006 On a Suzuki Boulevard C90 F616 Posts As I read the original problem statement, you wrote the right hand side as sq.rt. [2*(2/3)], but in your solution you calculated the right hand side as sq.rt. [2+(2/3)]. 2*(2/3) = 4/3 2+(2/3) = 8/3
2007-04-24, 18:11   #42
davieddy

"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England

2×3×13×83 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mfgoode Sorry for the confusion. 2.*sq.rt (2/3) = sq.rt. [2*(2/3)] ? Yes or No ? means 2 multiplied by the square root of 2/3 = square root of 2 multiplied by 2/3. So in one side the 2 is outside the square root on the other 2 is inside the square root. * is multiplication, []are brackets, Its not the Gaussklammer. '.' is full stop. It is not a riddle! Its just a maths curiosity which looks odd and that it is wrong but it is right. Mally
This post is damning Mally.

Last fiddled with by davieddy on 2007-04-24 at 18:45

2007-04-24, 18:46   #43
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist

Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

80416 Posts
Timing!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DJones Just one problem with your so-called solution. Your original post stated, and I quote; ...where the part under the root symbol on the right-hand side is NOT, as you claim, 2 and two-thirds, but rather 2 multiplied by two-thirds. Once again you have managed to mess up a puzzle by being inconsistent. You have done this so many times that I would not consider it to be a harsh judgement if people decided that you do this kind of thing deliberately so that you can then massage your ego with the false belief that you must be more mathematically-skilled than everyone else as we continually fail to solve your problems. A judgement which is only further supported by the fact that when people point out your errors to you, you claim they are ignorant or just upset that they couldn't solve it or both. That's not even mentioning your childish implications of stupidity when you tell them that they should go back to school in order to attain your supposed "high level" of mathematical capability. The way I see it you have three sensible options; 1. Stop posting "problems" 2. Learn how to write a problem in a clear and accurate fashion 3. Learn to accept when you've made a mistake, and thereby rendered the "problem" nonsensical

Yes DJones you appear like a phantom and read and digest my post and are able to quote me twice and write a long windy post all in 20 mins flat. I admire your speed indeed. And the shepherd (I cant remember his coded name) follows up just 4 mins later. Say you are lightning wizards who could stand up to our own whiz kid the well known Shakuntala Devi who beat a computer to its own game.

Well DJ I admit you have me on the mat this time. Im taking the count of nine and resuming before the tenth.

Yes I humbly admit I made a mistake in presenting my problem. This is due to my lack of expertise in lexicography if there is such a word ( Xilman I look forward to a correction if it is not) and not my malicious intentions of deliberately misleading anyone.

The motive you have given of me massaging my ego is not true. At my age there is no need for it as I have put my best years behind and all my achievements too.

Wait a minute I am tight lipped about this and can only say time will tell when I will require derogatory posts like yours to quote of the great opposition I have met from people like you who would like me to get the harsh treatment/ punishment I deserve.

It looks like you are getting sleepless nights over my posts. But I have a knock out punch left in me yet.

Out of the three points you have given I have to disappoint you on your very first. The other two are reasonable and I will try to take your advice. I can accept when they are wrong but not nonsensical as you say. Also I will not dispute my math skills over anyone. My Bronze medal for mathematics when I was 19 yrs speaks for itself.

And please dont belittle compilers of problems. They lead to solutions not intended by the originators. That's how knowledge mushrooms. History is replete with examples.

And here is my knock out punch.

You strained as if a gnat at the problem and did find the mistake why didnt you correct it there and then?

If you were so sure why didnt you answer NO? Why didnt you have the bloody guts (slang) to say so in the beginning? You could very well have boldly refuted it instead of riding at the back of the caravan all the while and then appearing at the front to lay hold of the harness of the leaders of the pack horses? WHY! WHY! WHY?
one two three.................. nine ten! You're counted out!

DJones this is not the end fellah. I'll catch up with you on another encounter but I have already been so by you, once bitten twice shy and the third time I bite! Or better still give us one of your problems as an error free one as an example?

Well all the best to you. May you go in peace and please dont quarrel with your wife over my problem now will you?

Mally

 2007-04-24, 21:24 #44 fetofs     Aug 2005 Brazil 2×181 Posts Getting the original problem statement equation wrong is human. Getting it and the clarification written in words wrong seems to be plain stupidity. And no long replys, they'll only make me more angry. I'll not be convinced.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post MattcAnderson MattcAnderson 28 2017-05-08 20:58 MattcAnderson MattcAnderson 0 2017-05-08 02:32 science_man_88 science_man_88 11 2014-07-30 22:53 Dougy Math 8 2010-06-17 22:01 davar55 Puzzles 6 2007-03-20 17:47

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:19.

Wed Sep 30 22:19:00 UTC 2020 up 20 days, 19:29, 0 users, load averages: 1.50, 1.51, 1.50