This is weird! (math thing)

[JayS]

Originally Posted by catinabag1

don't substitute the 2 until you simplify. in order for that situation to work you have to wait until you simplify because i created a special situation. you aren't following me at all. what math did you get to?

I reached a very high level of university maths.

Simplification of an equation does not change that equation: it merely makes it easier to deal with: the time at which the 2 is substituted has no effect on the solution. You are making simple schoolboy errors in your maths

write out your steps in simple form in your next post

[catinabag1]

Originally Posted by JayS

I reached a very high level of university maths.

Simplification of an equation does not change that equation: it merely makes it easier to deal with: the time at which the 2 is substituted has no effect on the solution. You are making simple schoolboy errors in your maths

write out your steps in simple form in your next post

actually the way i simplified it does change the equation. as i've said several times before, during my simplification i created a special situation to make it easier to simplify. without doing so you need to be able to take an integral of a complex number which i can not do. so to get around this i made a few assumptions, but this only makes the equation work for one value but my equation is right. you haven't been following me on this so i will no longer debate because it is a lost cause. also your simplifications have been wrong. my math checks out and is correct. check your own math before you insult mine.

[unidunc]

Mathletes! lol just playing. you guys have me lost...

[Niko]

Lol, this thread made me laugh hard. I am willing to hand out free "Math Loser" T-shirts. You can wear those and save yourself the work of adding more posts in this thread. catinabag1 gets one in gold, as a special price for his achievement of knowing complex numbers while at the same time remaining completely ignorant of mathematics.

And yes, I know I'm mean and arrogant. But it is hard to be not when reading a thread like this.

[JayS]

Originally Posted by catinabag1

actually the way i simplified it does change the equation. as i've said several times before, during my simplification i created a special situation to make it easier to simplify. without doing so you need to be able to take an integral of a complex number which i can not do. so to get around this i made a few assumptions, but this only makes the equation work for one value but my equation is right. you haven't been following me on this so i will no longer debate because it is a lost cause. also your simplifications have been wrong. my math checks out and is correct. check your own math before you insult mine.

I am not insulting your maths, just not giving you very many marks out of ten. I am sorry cat, but I have already checked mine: I put it into a post in very simplistic terms so you could follow it, and asked you to point out the errors. You were unable to do so. Your equation, which was a correct enough equation, did not work even for the values you chose: You miscalculated. It only works for the two real simple solutions of 2 and 0. I substituted your chosen value of 2+2i into the equation so as to demonstrate that fact for you, but you didn't bother to check it through, and declined to tell me where you think I went wrong.
I have no objections to your choosing a special situation, but when you put the values you chose into your equation they do not give a valid result.

[GILD]

Originally Posted by Niko

Lol, this thread made me laugh hard. I am willing to hand out free "Math Loser" T-shirts.

Can I buy some advertising space on those shirts?

This has got to be one of the more entertaining ePenii out-whippage threads we've had for a while.
Catinabag, zip it lad.

[kington99]

Originally Posted by GILD

This has got to be one of the more entertaining ePenii out-whippage threads we've had for a while.
Catinabag, zip it lad.

or to continue the metaphor, tuck it away

[Fooby]

This thread makes my head hurt, and by the way, about the very start of this thread someone said 1 and more are the only real numbers, zero point zero recuring then 1 on the end is the smallest number in my books, which is next to nothing, but still more than nothing.

[yoopers]

Originally Posted by Fooby

Zero point zero recuring then 1 on the end is the smallest number in my books, which is next to nothing, but still more than nothing.

What if you put a ½ on the end instead of a 1. ½ is smaller than one, isn't it?

[Niko]

Originally Posted by Fooby

about the very start of this thread someone said 1 and more are the only real numbers, zero point zero recuring then 1 on the end is the smallest number in my books, which is next to nothing, but still more than nothing.

Here, take a free T-shirt. And thank you for this intimate and disturbing view into the state of the educational system.

[MuniAddict]

Originally Posted by Niko

Lol, this thread made me laugh hard. I am willing to hand out free "Math Loser" T-shirts. You can wear those and save yourself the work of adding more posts in this thread. catinabag1 gets one in gold, as a special price for his achievement of knowing complex numbers while at the same time remaining completely ignorant of mathematics.

And yes, I know I'm mean and arrogant. But it is hard to be not when reading a thread like this.

Ok Niko, please go back to my *initial* post in this thread, and try to answer the original question. I just thought it was kinda cool that 2+2 *and* 2x2 equal the same number. I couldn't think of any other instance where two of the same numbers (other than zero, which I didn't consider) whether added or mulitplied, resulted in the same total.

[dudewithasock]

Originally Posted by catinabag1

here's what wikipedia has to say on the issue

"In mathematics, "infinity" is often used in contexts where it is treated as if it were a number (i.e., it counts or measures things: "an infinite number of terms") but it is a different type of "number" from the real numbers. Infinity is related to limits, aleph numbers, classes in set theory, Dedekind-infinite sets, large cardinals,[1] Russell's paradox, non-standard arithmetic, hyperreal numbers, projective geometry, extended real numbers and the absolute Infinite."

Oh come on, don't run to wikipedia for that. Seriously, just think about it. You can use any known formula you want, infinite does not represent an absolute number, it represents the idea of a never-ending increasing function, a limit to never be reached. No human has ever 'achieved' infinite or 'observed' infinite, thereby making an abstract concept.

[nimblelight]

Originally Posted by catinabag1

a black hole has infinie density. it has a defined mass but infinite density because everything is pulled to a single point in space-time.

no, as you approach the center of a black hole it approaches infinite density.
Infinity remains a limit.
unless i'm wrong.

[Seager]

As I read this thread I'm imagining this:

My math-fu is better than your math fu!
Oh yea! Crouching Alegbra!
I counter with Flying Multiplication!
Have a taste of my Taunting Calculus Technique!
Aha ha! I see an error in your technique! I counter with the Smug Nerd Counter-attack!
Ahh! I see your Math-fu is a match for mine!
Bow before me!
Oh ho! I sneak attack with the Infinite Number Conundrum!
Ahhh! You've trapped me in a quagmire of douchyness for all eternity! Nooooooooooooo
Oh nooo! I've fallen in myself! Aaarrg!

[hobo_chuck]

Originally Posted by nimblelight

no, as you approach the center of a black hole it approaches infinite density.
Infinity remains a limit.
unless i'm wrong.

You're not.
YOU CAN"T DIVIDE BY ZERO VOLUME!!!!