You are not logged in.
Hi,
Yes, has to be very crazy!
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Is the other conclusion true. Are dumb people saner? Does that make sense? Are they nicer?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Of course not!
Actually, what they consider to be crazy is perfectly normal.
The average minds think that all must be greedy and selfish, and that's normal.
"The crazy" do not waste time counting money, or prefering formal arguments over proof by exhaustion!
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
True enough. Listen to those guys at that site. They are supposedly bright and yet they are not.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Listen to those guys at that site.
Which site? mathoverflow?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Yes, sorry to be vague. They are also haughty.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes, they don't qualify to talk about him or his mathematics. Clearly arrogant.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Have you given the problem itself any thought?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I was thinking.
Couldn't get any simplification yet.
Do you know any fast computation?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
We could play spot the pattern and try to fit for smaller ones. Could use the method of residues. The recurrence is a possibility.
One thing I would not have done was just put this into a program and say well see you later.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes, or modify the GF a bit to make faster computation. I don't know yet.
There is 2 variable recurrence for partitions, but is that efficient?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
This is a pretty big GF. I do not know if anything is going to be efficient.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Did you read his paper?
Looks like there's precomputed values in his maple program. And some partial fractions.
Couldn't understand the program.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
No, I have not looked at the Sills paper yet. The code is in maple.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
Okay.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi;
Did you find the videos? There is a link in the other thread.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi,
Yes, I found it, thanks. Forgot to reply there, nice vids.
Last edited by gAr (2011-09-05 02:53:39)
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
How is the sound coming in for you?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Sound in the video?
Watched only 2 videos, sound's okay, but couldn't understand everything he said.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
He speaks with a very strong accent. I need headphones to understand him.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes, sometimes need to rewind and play it again to understand some of his words.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
He does seem to get very excited.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes, he does!
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Have you watched the short one on Transfinite numbers?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
New Problem:
You are given an integer t ( 0 to 9 ). You can use decimal points, multiplication, addition, division, subtraction, parentheses and exponentiation only. How close can you get to Euler's number using t only? You can use t as many times as you want.
A says) I got it using 3 t"s.
B says) Nonsense! Not with 3 you didn't.
C says) 4 t's is about right.
D says) Yep!
E says) 3 is definitely not the best.What is t and what is your expression?
Last edited by reconsideryouranswer (2011-09-05 23:23:44)
Signature line:
I wish a had a more interesting signature line.
Offline