Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 250 Rep.
View close votes
Badges
1 5
Newest
 Informed
Impact
~33k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 44 votes cast
Jun
9
awarded  Informed
Jan
12
comment Is it true that the Fibonacci sequence has the remainders when divided by 3 repeating?
If (0,0) were visited, wouldn't that mean it would always be 0? Seems that segment must never be visited (assuming you don't start a similar sequence with two multiples of 3).
Dec
19
awarded  Caucus
Dec
19
awarded  Constituent
Dec
15
awarded  Autobiographer
Aug
27
comment What is the average of no numbers?
I agree that 0 is a sane choice if it needs to be defined - and in practical scenarios, it might need to be. I would also suggest that if you are taking a mean of something with a known or expected population mean, some other value might be a good default to choose, such as said expected mean. Imputation basically works this way - when NaN doesn't suffice, and you need a point for each day, picking a point that makes sense with the other points is a reasonable choice.'
Jan
10
comment An oddity in some linear equations
Sort of like a binary tree, logically speaking. At the point in which you consider dividing by $x$, what you really do is have a node with two branches. if x≠0 then [divide by x] and if x=0 then [cannot divide by x]. You traverse the first branch, and end up with an absurdity; so that means you know the second branch is the correct branch, at which point you've solved the problem.
Jan
7
comment Pedagogy: How to cure students of the “law of universal linearity”?
I actually find it easier to explain $(x+3)(x+3) = (x+3)*x + (x+3)*3 $. IE, treating the _first_ $(x+3)$ term as a single unit, it becomes identical to $y(x+3)$, which then is easier to understand as $y*x + y*3$.
Jan
7
awarded  Teacher
Jan
7
answered Pedagogy: How to cure students of the “law of universal linearity”?
Feb
22
awarded  Supporter
Feb
22
comment What's next in this number series?
I came to the same answer independently; i'll say that my thought process was, 'Hmm, 340x2=680, I wonder if there is a relationship between 680 and 1428 - yep, 2.1...' and then just verified the rest. This is the sort of test they use to see if you have second-order thinking skills, so it is always a second degree relationship.