You are not logged in.
Why would you want to treat him any differently or not? If I told you I had it, would that change how you treat me just because you didn't know I had it before?
I don't quite understand what your trying to say, but I wouldn't quite call that aspergers unless I'm misunderstanding. Would you mind being more specific on what you think aspergers is, because at the moment, I'm more inclined to agree with bobbym...
Oh, don't worry, you didn't insult me or anyone I care for. I do fairly more strongly disagree with my friend. He's into things like that and eugenics and all (no insult intended if you believe in eugenics, just simply saying I disagree with it personally). We have argued it before, but unfortunately to no avail; he has his opinion, I have mine. I have a hard time figuring him out sometimes, but his personality is...noticeably different then mine to say the least.
Oh...interesting. Why do you think you have aspergers out of curiosity?
Agnishom, were you ever diagnosed with it?
Well I hate to say you might be wrong then. You see, the 3 people I told you about are my friend, my brother, and my father. All 3 are very good at math, I might be arguably the worst compared to them, especially my bro and father. My friend is closer to my level, but he's in college. In that sense, they are all math types, and it was my friend who is completely for this. My brother is the one who said we need a different solution, and my dad is the one who didn't really care that much, but did mention how he didn't agree with it. I tried also showing my sister, but she just did not even look at it, and therefore could not get her view.
Unless you mean something else by math type?
Hmm, you mind explaining how this is a joke though, because I don't really get it?
Hmm...
Am I too under-age?
Well, I could probably go on more philosophically about that question, but I won't. In short, no, you are not too underage. It is great to be into math, as too many people aren't, and completely ditch it later in life. I might not be the best with jokes, but this is who you are; how can you be too young for this (even if your jokes are arguably more mature)? You are interested in girls. Well, I know many people who I went to school with (weren't exactly friends with though, as I never had that many friends), who were interested in girls years before you. One of my...ex-friends I guess you can say, was interested in girls ever since he was 7 or 8 (sorry, it was first grade, I can't remember if it was actually age 7 or 8). If you consider yourself an early bird for this, then what are they? So again, in short, no.
(I might have explained my answer a bit more, but you don't have to believe me when I say, I definitely did not go on very philosophically about it, I kept it rather simple...)
Oh yes! I almost forgot to mention, I'm happy you are doing better Sarah!
Hi Raabi!
Welcome to the forum!
What specifically in computer science are you learning about (just curious)? Also have a good time as well!
Okay, I don't even know where to begin arguing with this...
No, 3 is allowed, 0.(9) isn't. There cannot be recurring 9's after the decimal point.
So I know more specifically about what your talking about, I'd like to see your response to...
Why not?
Stefy, supposing what you say is true, then what is the point of this argument in the first place? Why are there hyper real numbers even? You completely invalidate ... everything this controversy has to do with.
Here's a case where this could come in. 1/3 + 2/3 = 1. In decimal form, this can be argued to be 0.¯9 (not saying this is 1/3 and 2/3s tho). The issue directly has to do with decimal, because it is in base 10. This is impossible to accurately represent this in decimals in base 10 because the closest you can get is 0.¯3 and 0.¯6. Just simply looking at 0.¯3, and 0.¯6, what does 0.¯3 + 0.¯6 equal (only look at it like that is now, do not assume this is 1/3 and 2/3s, as I'm trying to represent how people get to this)? Even though it is repeated infinitely, it is irrelevant, because in the "end," it still never equals 1. Now to clear up any confusion, I am not saying this is equal to 1/3 + 2/3s, otherwise it would be 1. I'm only trying to represent (if you are able to look at it from a different mindset and not assume its 1/3 and 2/3s), a way to get to 0.¯9. In other words, 0.¯3 and 0.¯6 are not a fraction of 1, they are just numbers on their own. Now, I still don't know exactly what you are talking about, so I still would like to see what you say to to, "why not?"
SMBoy wrote:A = ...999
B = ...001
A + B = 1
If A was to Equal 1 on it's own then... A + B = Would Equal 1.1
First off "A + B = Would Equal 1.1" is blatantly false. A + B = 1. ...001, by your notation.
Secondly, that assumes that there is a "last digit". In your notation, the 9's clearly stop. There is a "last nine" in A, and in the same spot in B there is a corresponding 1. The problem is that this contradicts with the very definition of "infinity". If there are an infinite number of 9s, there can be no "last nine". That means that there is no corresponding location in B to put the 1, so B just becomes an infinite string of 0s. And 0.000.... (with an infinite number of 0s) = 0. So if B is 0, and A + B = 1, then A = 1.
I think what SMBoy is saying Maelwys is that if you add that to 0.9, or 0.99, or 0.999, regardless how many 9s there are, it will equal 1. But if you add the same thing to 1, you will get 1.1, or 1.01, or 1.001, etc. More showing how the 2 answers are different and not equal in that sense.
Hmm, I actually decided to look up this article and found some things about both the article and "The Onion" itself. The Onion doesn't even apparently have completely serious articles in the first place. They seem to turn real things into somewhat of a joke. This article is based off what these scientists really believe, and is based off what they actually quoted, but the onlion more turns it into some kind of joke (though I don't quite get the joke about that...). I also showed this article to...3 other people I know, all of which had fairly different responses.
1 person I showed it to thought they unfortunately are right, about how our world is too quickly going into overpopulation, and if we don't do something soon, it will lead to a more drastic situation. However, they thought the solutions were quite stupid, and was saying how there are much better solutions for this then that.
Another person said they'd be completely for this because if we don't do something and soon, it will be even worse. And that they actually admire them for coming out and speaking the truth, even knowing that many people might hate or dislike them for it.
The other person I talked to thinks little of this article. Not only disagreeing, but finding this article quite crazy. They also apparently already knew about the onion, as they were readers of it, and took it more as a joke. But as I already said, he found what they were saying to be crazy, and disagreed that we need to do something that extreme in the first place.
Now, though the onion might make a joke of this article (though I honestly don't understand how as I'm pretty bad at getting jokes myself...), but these are based on what real scientists believe through their studies. Just thought it would be interesting to bring up to everyone.
In my opinion, it is more disturbing if their information is more right, and we might have to find a solution and very soon for it. Even if it isn't as dire as they make it seem, I would be personally worried myself if this remains an issue for longer then it needs to be.
(To note: I have not researched this heavily, only a little bit and going off other people's word a bit. I did not really have the time to look into it very deeply, nor do I care enough to look into it that deeply. I just thought this would be interesting information to bring up to everyone when I found out about it.)
No problem. Thanks for letting me know so I other people wouldn't have the same issue.
Okay bob bundy, how is that?
There are scroll bars for you? Hmm...my guess is you have a lower resolution then I do, but okay, I'll try to shorten them even more.
Oh, sorry, I must have misread.
???
Last time I checked, hyper real numbers still existed. Just because you can't get to an actual answer of it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. What do you mean by that?
Yes, I noticed, I made numerous texts I had to fix because they went off screen....
Good thing you are allowed to edit...
Hi calligar the size of the words are fine thanks send messages ok?