Chris
Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 250 Rep.
 Dec30 comment Proving that a number is an integer. Ah, that to me is just simplifying. If you are computing that way then internally you are doing what Kundor has done, ie simplifying things. Personally I don't see this as a proof. Its just asking a computer for the answer. Though of course if you trust the computer to be right its proof enough I guess. Dec30 comment Proving that a number is an integer. @Dr.SonnhardGraubner: Can you clarify what you mean by compute then? You have an expression containing lots of cube roots of numbers that are irrational. They are not going to be able to be stored precisely in a computer so are you doing the calculation or just having something else do the simplification for you? Dec30 comment Proving that a number is an integer. If you are computing it anyway what is the point of expanding first? And how does this prove its an integer? If you are calculating via computers then you can't be sure there isn't some rounding error in there somewhere that makes something very very close to an integer look like an integer. Wouldn't just rearranging and simplifying be a more suitable proof? Dec19 comment Angle in a triangle within a circle. I didn't down vote but I am having trouble intuitively seeing why OTB is similar to ACB... Nov26 comment Degree-4 Polynomial @Kinhu: The first one looks like you may have lost a factor of 2 before the sqrt(2)... I've just done it in my head so I may be wrong but might be worth double checking... Aug22 comment How to solve the following equation by extracting square roots? @TiffanyLee: What is the problem you are having? Do you not understand what has been done here? Do you not understand how it applies to the other questions or something else? One thing all the stack sites have in common is wanting to help questioners learn and not just spoon feed answers... Aug22 comment How to solve the following equation by extracting square roots? Can anybody edit this to improve layout? A line break between the sentence and the question would make it much easier to read but I can't make the edit since it is telling me that I need to add at least 6 characters... Aug22 comment How to solve the following equation by extracting square roots? @labbhattacharjee: true, its not actually a square of a sensible number but square roots of both sides is still an easier way of solving it, I'd have thought. Aug22 comment How to solve the following equation by extracting square roots? @labbhattacharjee: that seems excessive when both sides are already squares so solving is just a matter of taking square roots. Jul16 comment Interview riddle Might be worth seeing if this would be a good fit for puzzling.stackexchange.com (I don't know if it is since although I've popped over there occasionally I've never wanted to post so haven't read their guidelines). Should have people who might be up for the challenge from a less mathematical point of view (which might be appropriate here). Jul15 asked Incorrect proof of the infinities between 0 and 1 and 0 and 2 Apr28 comment Give the remainder of $x^{100}$ divided by $(x-2)(x-1)$. Out of interest what is the proof that the remainder will be of the form ax+b? It seems like there should be a simple answer but I can't quite see it (happy to ask as a separate question if its not a comment length answer). Oh - or is it just that it must be a smaller order polynomial than what you are dividing by? Apr25 comment How to solve for a variable that is only in exponents? @MichaelHardy: sorry, I meant abiessu whose answer it was. I'm not sure how I got confused about it. :) Apr25 comment How to solve for a variable that is only in exponents? @MichaelHardy: Cool. It might be worth noting that in your question. For two reasons. Firstly I was initially suprised and confused by where the x=2 came from. Secondly my reading of the question is that the title is about solving for a variable in exponents and feels like a question about the general case. All the work you have done is obviously relevant for proving there is only one solution but it might be worth noting that there you'd have to use numerical techniques to get the actual answer. Just my thoughts. :) Apr24 comment How to solve for a variable that is only in exponents? How do you get the solution x=2? You might be able to guess it in this case but you might not have so much luck for different solutions so how would you then solve it? Apr4 comment How can a piece of A4 paper be folded in exactly three equal parts? @StevenTaschuk: Ah, that makes sense and is pretty obvious now you say it and makes a lot of sense. Apr4 comment How can a piece of A4 paper be folded in exactly three equal parts? @StevenTaschuk: What does it mean then? Apr3 comment Fibonacci trick and proving it. +1 for the geometric interpretation (and of course the correct proof). Mar28 comment Coin problem with 6 and 10 @MarcvanLeeuwen: Perhaps I should have said the correct response is that there is no valid answer. Mar28 comment Coin problem with 6 and 10 I think technically the answer is that there is no answer (ie no largest value). Giving you an infinite amount of 10s would give you infinity so you should likely avoid answers like that (and indeed any answer that pretends that infinity is an answer).