Reputation
Next privilege 125 Rep.
Vote down
Badges
4
Newest
 Commentator
Impact
0 people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 16 votes cast
Jun
23
awarded  Commentator
Jun
23
comment Are older mathematics textbooks still “valid”?
@HagenvonEitzen That last one is still true, though.
Sep
24
awarded  Autobiographer
Jun
10
comment 'Obvious' theorems that are actually false
@MJD Of the failure case, I meant.
Jun
9
comment 'Obvious' theorems that are actually false
Should it be assumed that "point" means "region on the dart board such that the area is 0" (or perhaps "0-dimensional region on the dart board", though the property would hold true for a 1-dimensional line as well), which would not necessarily coincide with the layman's definition of "point"?
Jun
9
comment 'Obvious' theorems that are actually false
What about higher-dimensional "edges"? (e.g. for $n=8$, there are no shared $(n-1)$-cubes, but what about $(n-2)$-cubes and so forth?) Or does the failure of the conjecture for $n>7$ imply that edges need not be shared either?
Jun
9
comment 'Obvious' theorems that are actually false
Would the logic equivalent be "This statement is false"?
Jan
31
comment Is conditional probability also probability?
@nomen Leaving aside Zado's (correct) comment, any (real, complex, or imaginary) number can be considered a ratio of itself out of 1. It's just that such treatment normally has no meaning on its own except as an intermediate step in an operation.
Jan
31
comment Is conditional probability also probability?
@smwikipedia To elaborate on Goos' comment, % is (usually) read as "percent", or more clearly, "per cent", where cent = 100. Thus, it defines an implicit ratio, in this case 80 out of 100 (which of course simplifies to the 4 out of 5 Goos mentions). In short, $P(X) = (100 * P(X))\%$.
Jan
17
comment Why do logarithms produce such difficult problems
As an extension, the reason the integer 2 (as opposed to a non-integer real value) is an exact solution is that this is a case of the more general equation $\log_{a}\left(x+u\right)=1-\log_{b}\left(x-v\right)$ where $x-v=1$ and $x+u=a$, which reduces the problem to $\log_{a}\left(a\right)=1-\log_{b}\left(1\right)$, $1=1-0$, $1=1$.
Jan
14
comment Splitting a sandwich and not feeling deceived
@user1729 Engineering students, not graduated engineers. It'd be their final design project.
Jan
14
comment Splitting a sandwich and not feeling deceived
@user1729 Engineering students would design the machine to ensure accurate proportioning to start with, you'd only need one button to start the machine (and to stop it, for safety reasons).
Jun
25
awarded  Informed
May
30
awarded  Supporter