28 Sep 17
Originally posted by @eladarNow you say 'equal' is the same as 'appear to be exactly the same'.
I did mean what I wrote. If you can't tell the difference then they appear to be exactly the same.
And yet you say you were right before. Now you admit that you were wrong. I just don't get it.
Do you say you was wrong or don't you? For me it appears that you are wrong, therefore you are wrong, according to your new definition.
I cannot differ a Heineken from a Carlsberg in a blind test. They appear to be the same. Therefore they are exactly the same, you say. 'Appear'? Well, rather sloppy definition, don't you think?. Niether Carlsberg nor Heineken want to accept that Carlsberg and Heineken is the same beer.
Two apples looks the same, therefore they are the same. You buy these two. But one are rotten inside. But never mind, they are the same. Eh...?
28 Sep 17
Originally posted by @humyIt is what I was trying to say.
No. Just split them into a group of 2 and a group of 3.
But hey if you just want to be labeled an idiot for not understanding why g+1 is not the same as (g^2-1)/(g-1) then fine you are just a moron.
No one here cares.
Originally posted by @eladarI assume only you would use that label on me just for not immediately fully understanding a piece of maths that most laypeople also wouldn't immediately fully understand, nobody else. And you are wrong anyway; g+1 = (g^2-1)/(g-1) for g≠1 means g+1 is the same as (g^2-1)/(g-1) for g≠1 with that "for g≠1", because people are often lazy at typing or writing, often being implicit i.e. not explicitly stated but that doesn't mean people aren't aware of it or have a misconception about it. I for one was already well aware of it as that is just obvious basic maths understanding that I had well before leaving school. You have totally failed to tell us something we didn't already know.
if you just want to be labeled an idiot for not understanding why g+1 is not the same as (g^2-1)/(g-1) ...
28 Sep 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @humyBecause you had it in school as a child, but didn't learn it when it was taught. It took someone who did learn the concept to teach it too you again. If you were smart enough you would not have needed the extra help. The problem is yours not the way math is taught.
I assume only you would use that label on me just for not immediately fully understanding a piece of maths that most laypeople also wouldn't immediately fully understand, nobody else. And you are wrong anyway; g+1 = (g^2-1)/(g-1) for g≠1 means g+1 is the same as (g^2-1)/(g-1) for g≠1 with that "for g≠1", because people are often lazy at typing or writing, ofte ...[text shortened]... well before leaving school. You have totally failed to tell us something we didn't already know.
28 Sep 17
Originally posted by @eladarEladar isn't particularly known for being humble.
It is what I was trying to say.
But hey if you just want to be labeled an idiot for not understanding why g+1 is not the same as (g^2-1)/(g-1) then fine you are just a moron.
No one here cares.
In that sense he is not christian.
28 Sep 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasI don't know about that. Christ would not have considered himself to be humble. When you call yourself the son of god himself, that is not exactly a good roll model for humble.
Eladar isn't particularly known for being humble.
In that sense he is not christian.
28 Sep 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasYou are the one saying it is his fault because he is stupid, not me. He agreed. There is nothing wrong with how it is taught. If a person doesn't really understand, it is the individual's fault.
Eladar isn't particularly known for being humble.
In that sense he is not christian.
This isn't my position, I just gave up trying to convince people otherwise.
29 Sep 17
Originally posted by @eladarYou're asking? Then I will answer:
You are the one saying it is his fault because he is stupid, not me. He agreed. There is nothing wrong with how it is taught. If a person doesn't really understand, it is the individual's fault.
This isn't my position, I just gave up trying to convince people otherwise.
I'm saying that you behaves like a child instead of being humble and admit that you're wrong. Very un-christian.
And remember, before you deliver your usual insults, you asked and I answered.
Think about this answer above and see if this may make your personality friendlier or not.
29 Sep 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasOf course you see it that way. I refuse to play your game so I am a child, when it is you who is just trying to be funny.
You're asking? Then I will answer:
I'm saying that you behaves like a child instead of being humble and admit that you're wrong. Very un-christian.
And remember, before you deliver your usual insults, you asked and I answered.
Think about this answer above and see if this may make your personality friendlier or not.
29 Sep 17
Originally posted by @eladarThe play is to be honest. If you are wrong, you admit it. If I am wrong, I admit it. That's the game to play if one wants respect.
Of course you see it that way. I refuse to play your game so I am a child, when it is you who is just trying to be funny.
To admit to be wrong you are strong, not weak. Weakness is shown to refuse to admit you're wrong. Are you strong or are you weak. I think you've shown this very well.
29 Sep 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @fabianfnasThe topic is what equal means in math. All the different things that it can mean and how it is viewed by people.
The play is to be honest. If you are wrong, you admit it. If I am wrong, I admit it. That's the game to play if one wants respect.
To admit to be wrong you are strong, not weak. Weakness is shown to refuse to admit you're wrong. Are you strong or are you weak. I think you've shown this very well.
If you have a better example of how equal is used to imply different things, that would be great. If you want to belabor minutia, then that's your folly.
Although yes, not apple is exactly the same as another, there are apples so similar that people would not be able to tell them apart.