You are not logged in.
Thuts nott ferry fair, boyo ...
Kenny Felder might know, he knows lots about the 83 and 84, and so might be able to help you.
Visit http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/kenny/papers/ti.html, and his email address is at the bottom.
What a neat approach ... I haven't checked your answer, but the approach looks sound !
I will put it as part of official solution when I get a chance. Should I credit "cnaumann" ?
Ooohh ... someone shouldn't schedule exams like that.
I hope you do well.
(If they use the same questions for other people on another day, I wonder if the results would be better?)
It goes ceiling, then roof, then sky.
Or for some people, ceiling, floor, people upstairs, ceiling, floor, people above them, ... ceiling, roof, sky
It seems to be a general thing - the males birds are usually the most beautiful.
I think it is something to do with impressing the females at how AMAZING they can look and still LIVE in a world of hawks and falcons.
SO, if that is true it is the species of bird that gets HUNTED where the males are gaudy and the females just fade into the woodwork.
Hi, jess. I would love to help you out, but there isn't much time is there? Maths needs lots of practice.
I find to learn something new, I need to read about it first, get confused, do some practice questions, THEN go back and read it again with more understanding, then more practice.
Only the BEST for this forum!
Well impressed.
Was that a Sheep-Ovis joke?
oh, this and that, and how are you ravali?
Here you go, princess, a page that explains all about it: powers of 10
After reading that, hopefully this will make sense:
(1.2 times 10 to the fith power) = 1.2 x 10^5 = 1.2 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 = 1.2 x 100000 = 120,000
(1.2 times 10 to the negative eighth power) 1.2 x 10^-8 = 1.2 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 x 1/ 10 = 1.2 x 0.00000001 = 0.000000012
That is really impressive, stewie. Perhaps YOU should be answering the "Help Me!" forum ...
Hiya kirsty, and welcome!
I can put your address back if you are over 13. Just a little precaution to protect our younger members.
Hmmm ... if you treat (A*e^c) as a constant, call it "f" then you have:
f t^b
which is easily differentiated as
f t^b ln(b)
(derivative of a^x = a^x ln a)
There may be something special with your formula that I am not aware of, though!
Hi, and welcome rachel. Sorry about the boyfriend.
Whoaa ... cool illustration!
It DRAGS space and time AROUND in a circle?
Yes, please, DO try ... and tell us the results. Think of it as an experiment.
I have 3 ideas.
One is Piaget's capacity idea - you know - short fat holds the same as long thin. Use glasses of different widths/heights and coloured water.Get the kids to estimate before you pour. (Young kids often assume the tall will hold more - it is so funny when they stare in amazement as you keep pouring from tall to short and it doesn't overflow!) But older kids can do things like use measuring cups and pens to mark things out.
Another idea is to have rocks, pebbles sand and water. Get a large glass container and fill it with rocks. Then add pebbles, and they fit (around the rocks - give it a shake)! Then add sand, and it fits! Then add water and it fits! You can show how this works by emptying then filling with water, then show the water spilling out when you add rocks, pebbles, sand.
My third idea: give them a challenge with one of these measuring puzzles
Hey, Rora, you have had a make-over (new butterfly!). Nice.
Wow, cool car!! Wouldn't want to get in its way ... could the driver see forward? What would he see? What was behind him?
Well, from the car's perspective (ie as a passenger) you should see the headlights beam cast forward, I think. But an onlooker would not, or something, I think. ... umm ... I wish Einstein were here!
Hi again, Milos. Yes, you are perfectly right! Careful of those x^2 terms!
BTW you could have a go at some of the other problems that eurasiangurl posted ...
This one, Milos?
My maths tutor told me this, and I'm very curious about it. Every time I try to follow it, I get confused. It apparently proves that 1=0.
x=1.
Multiply both sides by x and you get
x^2=x
Take away 1 from each side which becomes
x^2-1=x-1
This can also be expressed as
(x+1)+(x-1)=x-1
Divide each side by x-1 and the answer is:
x+1=1
From this, you can see that x=0. But at the beginning I said that x=1. It has therefore been proved that 1=0.Is this a trick?
Isn't it just because we are dividing by zero again? "Divide each side by x-1", but we stated that x=1?
We have a little tool that can help with that: Prime Factorization Tool, it also helps to read Prime and Composite Numbers
This tool will work out which Prime Numbers are the factors of the number you enter, but your question said "factors", and not "Prime factors", so there may be combinations that work.
Let's have a go:
7 is a Prime Number, so has no other factors (other than one or itself!) ... Answer: 2 (ie 1 and 7)
9's factors are 3 and 3 ... Answer: 3 (ie 1,3,9)
11 is Prime ... Answer: 2
25's factors are 5 and 5 ... Answer: 3
29 is Prime ... Answer: 2
47 is Prime ... Answer: 2
81 is 3x3x3x3, so it is also 3x27, 9x9 ... Answer: 5 (ie: 1,3,9,27,81)
(I notice that your question said "does the number have just one factor yes or no", so they may have taught that 1 is not a factor, in which case just subtract one from my answers!)
Funny!
Three French Cats called Un, Deux and Trois went sailing one day ... what happened to them?
It was so sad: Un, Deux, Trois, Cat, Sank