You are not logged in.
Septimus wrote:478 689 242 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years
Hmm...I doubt the caterpillar would actually live that long, though.
My answer: The caterpillar stands no chance of reaching the end.
I doubt the universe will live that long.
I could see that given enough time, the caterpillars progress each second would be greater than the rate at which the bungee lengthened, since the caterpillar's position with respect to time had a non-zero positive second derivative, while the second derivative of the bungee length was zero.
I wrote a C program to find the solution recursively, but after it ran for about twelve hours it was still not finished running.
Hello there!
I found this place recently... looks really nice, I'm surprised I never found it before! I'm sure I'll enjoy it here
Edit: (thought I'd add a bit more than just "Hi there!")
I'm from Durham in the UK. I have to say, I'm impressed that this forum can use LaTeX inputs (and also that I can remember how to use LaTeX:P), otherwise things could get very messy!
Am looking forward to helping a few people out and keeping up my math skills at various levels, I would hate to have them just fade away on me.
There's no particular area of maths that I would say I "specialise" in, or am more interested in than any other, though I can definitely appreciate the beauty of calculus for itself.
Is that DB Cooper in your avatar? Are you DB Cooper?
So what would happen if there be some "law of thermodynamics", but one that applies to both physical and metaphysical?
Perhaps you'll find this page interesting.
Alright, i'm trying to do this game with some friends..
And it's a timed game.. heres an example..
Start time is at 1: 20 pm
multiple people, have x amount of boxes to do
theres different amounts for each person.. and everyone starts at the same time but ends at a different time when they are done.
Lets say 1st player has 87 boxes, and finishes at 1: 43pm
How would i find out the amount of boxes done in hours ?
Is there a solution/formula base for finding out?
Any thoughts at all would help!
1:43pm minus 1:20 pm equals 23 minutes
23 minutes = 23/60 hours
(87 boxes) / ((23/60)hours) = number of boxes per hour.
It's been my experience that people who have problems with windows don't know how to use windows.
I have never had a virus since I became computerly (new word!) literate. Why? Because when I get an email that says, "Click here and download this program!", amazingly enough, I don't. There are very few ways that viruses can get onto your computer without some sort of user interaction (mistake).
I agree; the people who have the problems with windows don't know how to use windows. Unfortunately, that describes a pretty large proportion of Windows users, perhaps even a majority. Since Mac OS X is far less prone to viruses, than Windows, these users are generally better prepared for internet usage on a Mac.
The only "viruses" that have been found for Apple's Tiger operating system require multiple installation steps, including the user entering an administrator's password.
That's because not enough people use macs to write viruses for it.
Actually, there are far more obscure operating systems with viruses written for them. If I had the time, I would dig out the article showing a few such examples. OS X's security is by design, not by obscurity.
Virtually everything is more user friendly on the Mac.
Hence why I hate Mac's. Too dang friendly, too many graphics.
So use Terminal. No need to be a hater!
Apple's operating system may not be free, but it certainly works better than Windows.
Yea, ok. And by how do you judge such a comparison? Your personal experience?
My experience and the experience of at least a dozen friends who have all switched within the past couple of years, without regret. Most made the switch for the superior OOTB video editing capabilities, but now use their Macs for all their other computer needs, as well.
I like the fact that there's virtually no viruses, and the software is more user friendly. I also like that I don't have to worry about adware or spyware. My roommate, on the other hand, who is a computer geek's computer guru, uses Macs nearly exclusively for his own reasons. I could ask him what those reasons are, but I have to be in class in 13 hours, so there is not enough time! He knows both OSs inside and out. Macs are great for those who don't know much about computers, like me, and for those that know way too much about computers, like him.
So what are you saying, Ricky? Windows is *worse* than a virus?
If only there were a simple replacement ... Linux holds promise, but never fulfilled. I think we need a version that installs and works similar (or better) than Windows, so people will say "just use X, its free and works better". For example switching to Firefox is easy - it is similar enough that you only notice it is better.
Personally, I switched from a Windows XP machine to a Mac OS X machine, and have never looked back.
Out of the box security is WAYYYY better than Windows. The only "viruses" that have been found for Apple's Tiger operating system require multiple installation steps, including the user entering an administrator's password.
Virtually everything is more user friendly on the Mac. The biggest problem I had when switching was realizing that fewer steps were usually necessary to accomplish the same task, as compared to my Windows machine.
I used to believe that computers had issues, but now I realize that Windows has issues. Apple's operating system may not be free, but it certainly works better than Windows.
100% correct. Remember, all you have to do is find the error in my proof. You don't have to prove my conjecture incorrect, although you get 10 bonus points for doing so. (1 goggol bonus points gets you a "Good job" from me).
To be a bit more exact, the error was here:
Let 2a = k. k is defined as a natural number. By forcing it to be equal to 2a, you are making k be even, and so the proof no longer applies to all even naturals.
Just a reminder All_Is_Number, you have up to 24 hours to post a new proof, or you may pass it on to someone else.
Since I've never really had any formal instruction on proofs (evidenced by this thread), I'll have to pass.
It's much easier just to find a scenario in which an incorrect proof contradicts itself.
No one wants to take it? Ok, try this one.
Natural number: A positive integer
Prove that every even natural number can be represented by 4a, where a is also a natural number.
Proof: Let n = 2k, where k is a natural number. Then n is an even natural number. So 4a = 2(2a). Let 2a = k, so 2(2a) = 2(k) = 2k = n.
Therefore, 4a = n for any natural number n.
k = 1
n = 2k = 2
2 = 4a
1/2 = a
1/2 is not a natural number, therefore not every even natural number can be represented by 4a, where a is also a natural number.
The Mythbusters proved that drunk driving is more dangerous than driving while talking on a mobile phone. Reead on for more information.
The Mythbusters set out on to a racetrack to prove that drunk driving is, in fact, more dangerous than talking on a mobile phone. They used three people - A female, a male, and another male. They were given ordinary cars, and they were all asked to perform three tasks - They were asked to try parallel parking, stopping at a certain sign, and going through an obstacle course. Of course, the Mythbusters tried each of these shortly after drinking a short amount of alcohol. They were asked no to eat anything for 2-3 days, for the maximum result. The drunk driving was terrible - Everyone failed the parallel parking and stopping at the sign, and one of them even failed all three tasks! They then tried the same with a mobile phone. They proved that it was easier driving with a mobile phone because of two reasons - One, they had better control while driving, and two, they could easily put the mobile phone down if they were to crash or have an accident.
Thus, the Mythbusters proved that drunk driving is more dangerous by a wide margin than driving while talking on a mobile phone.
This part tells me they were trying to prove driving drunk was more dangerous, instead of trying to find which is more dangerous. The difference is subtle, but very important.
Mythbusters is after ratings. Their conclusions are often challenged by those better versed in the scientific method.
Maybe when I get Audacity I will be able to for once.
I used Audacity to mix some trance. It crashed often, so I had to remember to save often, but aside from that I was very happy with the free software.
Numbers are the alphabet of God.
Just as a future recommendation, make a new post stating the mistake and correcting it, don't go back and edit it. It makes it much easier for others reading the topic.
You're right. My mistake.
The captain will take 98 coins, and will give one coin to the third most senior pirate and another coin to the most junior pirate.
If there were 2 pirates, pirate 2 being the most senior, he would just vote for himself and that would be 50% of the vote, so he's obviously going to keep all the money for himself. If there were 3 pirates, pirate 3 has to convince at least one other person to join in his plan. Pirate 3 would take 99 gold coins and give 1 coin to pirate 1. Pirate 1 knows if he does not vote for pirate 3, then he gets nothing, so obviously is going to vote for this plan. If there were 4 pirates, pirate 4 would give 1 coin to pirate 2, and pirate 2 knows if he does not vote for pirate 4, then he gets nothing, so obviously is going to vote for this plan.
As there are 5 pirates, pirates 1 and 3 had obviously better vote for the captain, or they face choosing nothing or risking a horrible death.
Correct answer and logic. excellent
99, 0, 1, 0, 0
Close. Very close. I think such a split would lose the vote.
I tried for about a half hour (the amount of time it takes to drive home from work) to find a counter example. I'm glad I stopped there:
Good thinking, All, you were completely right. The proof also holds for points of discontinuity, you just have to adjust some words here and there.
Thanks for the proof, Ricky. You were much clearer and more concise than I was.
Regarding your (new) first post:
tan(-3)*cos(-3) / |cos(-3)| ~ -.1425, and thus, the equality can't hold since |tan(x)| must be positive.
I've edited the first post since then, since I can't, for the life of me, seem to recall the exact problem where I first noticed this.
Wait a minute. How can you factor out cos(x)/|cos(x)|? That isn't factoring our anything, that's completely changing the function. When tan(x) is negative, there will be times when cos(x)/|cos(x)| is positive. Thus, if such where the case:
tan(x) * cos(x)/|cos(x)| = negative * postive = negative.
But if we are to assume tan(x)*cos(x)/|cos(x)| = |tan(x)|, then it would be that negative = positive.
You're right. In the third quadrant, tan(x) is positive, yet cos(x) is negative. I chose a bad example. This situation came up several months ago, and I do not have the exact problem handy, so I made one up. Unfortunately, I did not make up a very applicable one.
I have edited my original post to correct that issue, but it still is not an example that shows the principle as perfectly as the one I had months ago.
I was thinking deep under the ocean, where there is a lot of pressure.
Wouldn't that pressure actually allow more air inside without risk of (trying to not give away your answer) "system failure?"
You can take a constant out of such integrals because constants don't change as x changes. The same is not true for cos(x)/|cos(x)|.
But, at any defined point, cos(x)/|cos(x)| has a derivative of zero. Why can't it be treated as a constant? It is defined everywhere tan(x) is, so it shouldn't cause problems.
I've used this method to solve differential equations, and ended up with the correct answer, but my answer was correct on all intervals, whereas the book's and instructor's answers were defined only on certain intervals.
I'm not trying to be difficult or argumentative. I'm trying to understand why I can or cannot do something that will always work, given the proper (recognizable) conditions.
Devanté wrote:
#52 Throw it off the highest building, and I'll not break. But put me in the ocean, and I will. What am I?
Why would one of those break in the ocean? From the salt? The pressure should be uniform all around, right?
In general, if you have:
integral of f(x)g(x)
You can not do:
f(x) times integral of g(x).
A simple example:
Let f(x) = x and g(x) = x.
Right. I understand that generally f(x) cannot be factored out of the integral. But what if f(x) has a derivative of zero everywhere it is defined? Can't we then treat it as a constant if it is defined everywhere g(x) is defined?
From my understanding of Calculus, the reason we cannot normally factor out f(x) is because f(x) generally does not have a derivative of zero, and it is this non zero derivative which causes problems.
I know Latex can be used to write expressions in a nice mathematical format. I don't know how to use Latex. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one, either.
Any possibility of placing a sticky thread explaining Latex syntax at the top of the Help Me forum or some other suitable location?
Thanks.
Here is my proposal:
Example:
If this is not a valid method, why not? I know I have factored out a function of x from an integral, but I have done so under very restrictive conditions so that it will not result in an incorrect answer.
#41 What gets wetter and wetter the more it dries?
#42 You throw away the outside and cook the inside. Then you eat the outside and throw away the inside. What did you eat?
#43 What goes up and down the stairs without moving?
#44 What can you catch but not throw?
#45 I can run but not walk. Wherever I go, thought follows close behind. What am I?
???
#46 What's black and white and red all over?
#47 What goes around the world but stays in a corner?
#48 I have holes in my top and bottom, my left and right, and in the middle. But I still hold water. What am I?
#49 Give me food, and I will live; give me water, and I will die. What am I?
#50 The man who invented it doesn't want it. The man who bought it doesn't need it. The man who needs it doesn't know it. What is it?
#51 I run over fields and woods all day. Under the bed at night I sit not alone. My tongue hangs out, up and to the rear, awaiting to be filled in the morning. What am I?
#52 Throw it off the highest building, and I'll not break. But put me in the ocean, and I will. What am I?
???
#53 What can run but never walks, has a mouth but never talks, has a head but never weeps, has a bed but never sleeps?
#54 No sooner spoken than broken. What is it?
#55 A certain crime is punishable if attempted but not punishable if committed. What is it?
#56 You use a knife to slice my head and weep beside me when I am dead. What am I?
#57 I'm the part of the bird that's not in the sky. I can swim in the ocean and yet remain dry. What am I?
???
#58 I am mother and father, but never birth or nurse. I'm rarely still, but I never wander. What am I?
#59 I went into the woods and got it. I sat down to seek it. I brought it home with me because I couldn't find it. What is it?
???
#60 I am weightless, but you can see me. Put me in a bucket, and I'll make it lighter. What am I?