Go back
2+2=5

2+2=5

Posers and Puzzles

P
Upward Spiral

Halfway

Joined
02 Aug 04
Moves
8702
Clock
21 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by FabianFnas
We sit both firm and steady on the high horse, we shouldn't leave it.
We should be wearing our hard hats then. 😉

MS

Under Cover

Joined
25 Feb 04
Moves
28912
Clock
24 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eatmybishop
no its not, you're wrong...

i was under the impression is was binary to decimal.. so you're right there, there is no 4 or 256 in binary... however you're still wrong...

in binary, it would be 10+10=10... you are wrong to say 100, its not, 1 + 1 = 1 or 0 + 1 = 1, 0 + 0 = 0.... there is no additional digit.... mr dumb!
I have just read this entire thread. I'm no mathemetician, but this post is just about the most absurd thing I have ever read. I think the average fourth grader understands binary numbers better than this.

AThousandYoung
He didn't...Diddy?

tinyurl.com/2p9w6j3b

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26701
Clock
26 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
I have just read this entire thread. I'm no mathemetician, but this post is just about the most absurd thing I have ever read. I think the average fourth grader understands binary numbers better than this.
I'm an educator, and believe me, the average fourth grader has never heard the word binary before.

MS

Under Cover

Joined
25 Feb 04
Moves
28912
Clock
26 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I'm an educator, and believe me, the average fourth grader has never heard the word binary before.
Nice job missing the point there.

AThousandYoung
He didn't...Diddy?

tinyurl.com/2p9w6j3b

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26701
Clock
26 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
Nice job missing the point there.
Nice job failing to make your point there.

MS

Under Cover

Joined
25 Feb 04
Moves
28912
Clock
26 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Nice job failing to make your point there.
The source that I quoted obviously had no understanding of binary numbers. The point was abundantly obvious. I spelled it out because you were clearly having problems with it. Cheers.

AThousandYoung
He didn't...Diddy?

tinyurl.com/2p9w6j3b

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26701
Clock
27 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
The source that I quoted obviously had no understanding of binary numbers. The point was abundantly obvious. I spelled it out because you were clearly having problems with it. Cheers.
I got the point in the first place. Your sarcastic joke was just...bad.

It's like...

"Dude! That box is HEAVY! Even a paraplegic couldn't pick THAT thing up!"

It just doesn't make sense...

N

The sky

Joined
05 Apr 05
Moves
10385
Clock
27 Sep 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I'm an educator, and believe me, the average fourth grader has never heard the word binary before.
However, the average fourth grader would probably be able to understand it a lot more quickly than eatmybishop if it were explained to them (eatmybishop would probably also have been able to understand it a lot more quickly if he'd be less stubborn). We learned binary in fifth grade, and I don't think the average student had any trouble to grasp the concept.

t

not quite sure.help!

Joined
23 Nov 06
Moves
2032
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You mean .9 recurring = 1 yes?

let X= 0.999999 .....

then 10X = 9.99999999 .....
X = 0.99999999 ....
subtract

therefore 10X - X = 9

therefore 9X = 9

therefore X = 1 QED
that may be one way and yes i meant recurring. anyways this is my solution:
1/3= 0.3333333...
2/3=0.6666666....
--------------------
3/3=0.9999999....

its very rough but thats the way i found it. im sure you guys no that 3/3 is 1 otherwise this thread wouldnt be here.

F

Joined
11 Nov 05
Moves
43938
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tournymangr
that may be one way and yes i meant recurring. anyways this is my solution:
1/3= 0.3333333...
2/3=0.6666666....
--------------------
3/3=0.9999999....

its very rough but thats the way i found it. im sure you guys no that 3/3 is 1 otherwise this thread wouldnt be here.
Or in the tersiary system
0.1
0.2
1.0

The fact is that when you calculate in thirds and ninths and 1/(3^n) the calculations become very much simpler than in the usual decimal system.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tournymangr
that may be one way and yes i meant recurring. anyways this is my solution:
1/3= 0.3333333...
2/3=0.6666666....
--------------------
3/3=0.9999999....

its very rough but thats the way i found it. im sure you guys no that 3/3 is 1 otherwise this thread wouldnt be here.
You have started with the assumption that 1/3 = 0.3333... which was not given.

(Prove that 0.333 .... = 1/3 !)

F

Joined
11 Nov 05
Moves
43938
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You have started with the assumption that 1/3 = 0.3333... which was not given.

(Prove that 0.333 .... = 1/3 !)
But this was not an assumption, it's a fact, and can easily be proven:

Let x = 0.33333...
Then 10x = 3.33333...
Subtraction gives that 10x-x = 9x = 3.33333... - 0.33333... = 3
And if 9x = 3 then x must be 3/9 = 1/3 and that's the proof.

Every decimal number with a repetetive decimals can be written as p/q with p and q are integers.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Fabian!
I know its a fact.
I know you know its a fact.
I know that 0.999. = 1 is a FACT.
I know that EVERYONE knows that 0.999.. = 1 is a fact. FACT!!

Its a fact BECAUSE it can be proven!

And we were asked to prove it.

F

Joined
11 Nov 05
Moves
43938
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Fabian!
Its a fact BECAUSE it can be proven!
And we were asked to prove it.
And that's exactly the reason that I proved it.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
01 Oct 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Ok
I was talking about the ORIGINAL question ...

I thought you were questioning my dimissal of Tournymanagers 'proof' which is of course invalid as a proof although obviously true.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.