Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °
| |
|
|
You are not logged in. #76 2012-03-05 01:14:05
Re: Bafflers?You were there when I answered John Franklin's question. It was so easy he picked up on it right away. Do you need more than that? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #77 2012-03-05 01:24:49
Re: Bafflers?Ok, I get that one, but look at this problem; The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #78 2012-03-05 01:33:05
Re: Bafflers?Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #79 2012-03-05 01:35:20
Re: Bafflers?How did you get that? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #80 2012-03-05 01:38:49
Re: Bafflers?You are trying to solve the diophantine equation In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #81 2012-03-05 01:42:13
Re: Bafflers?That's pretty much it.But how do you arrive at the answer with GF's? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #82 2012-03-05 01:46:08
Re: Bafflers?Now check the coefficient of x^10. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #83 2012-03-05 02:04:52
Re: Bafflers?But what about the condition that there of at least one pigeon on each cage? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #84 2012-03-05 02:06:20
Re: Bafflers?Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #85 2012-03-05 02:11:47
Re: Bafflers?So we just take out the 1. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #86 2012-03-05 02:14:38
Re: Bafflers?Yes. The 1 represents x^0. There is no 0 choice because there must be at least one pigeon per box. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #87 2012-03-05 19:42:19
Re: Bafflers?Hi bobbym The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #88 2012-03-05 22:07:57
Re: Bafflers?You do not need a Laurent series here. There are ways that help you get the coefficients we need. But they are rather limited. There are limits to what can be done by hand. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #89 2012-03-05 22:50:45
Re: Bafflers?And what's that way? And what if I wanted the answer in binomial form? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #90 2012-03-05 22:57:27
Re: Bafflers?Hi; it does not look very promising though. I have not heard of Eurovision. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #91 2012-03-05 23:10:40
Re: Bafflers?Ok, but if I wanted it in the binomial form? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #92 2012-03-05 23:12:32
Re: Bafflers?Then you would have to solve the diophantine equation using the formula. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #93 2012-03-05 23:23:34
Re: Bafflers?But is there a way to get it directly out of the GF? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #94 2012-03-05 23:25:37
Re: Bafflers?In this case you could play spot the pattern with the generating function. Other methods do not look promising. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #95 2012-03-05 23:36:20
Re: Bafflers?Ok, then.When can we expect more problems? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #96 2012-03-05 23:39:12
Re: Bafflers?As soon as I get back here. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #97 2012-03-05 23:54:24
Re: Bafflers?Back where? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #98 2012-03-06 02:25:15
Re: Bafflers?Back in the forum. I have some work to do. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #99 2012-03-06 06:17:03
Re: Bafflers?So where's the problem? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “A secret's worth depends on the people from whom it must be kept.” ― Carlos Ruiz Zafón #100 2012-03-06 07:58:33
Re: Bafflers?Baffler #2 In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. |