Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #901 20120926 03:10:12
Re: Bafflers?Nice problem, btw. I enjoyed it. "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #902 20120926 03:12:47
Re: Bafflers?Yes, it was tricky to solve mathematically too. You did show me a trick or two with your use of geogebra. Thanks for working on the problem. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #903 20120926 03:28:34
Re: Bafflers?I made a start on a mathematical solution to see if I could get to your 100 decimaldigit solution, but after struggling with it for a fair bit I let it go and solved it with Geogebra in a flash. So easy to use for something like this! I couldn't work out how to calculate segment areas to the same umpteen decimal places as the poly, and as it was getting too late I let it go and took the Geogebra road instead. When I'm more awake I might try again for the mathematical solution. Last edited by phrontister (20120926 03:38:35) "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #904 20120926 03:40:21
Re: Bafflers?Hi phrontister; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #905 20120926 03:51:38
Re: Bafflers?Hi Bobby, "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #906 20120926 03:55:59
Re: Bafflers?Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #907 20120926 04:55:51
Re: Bafflers?
Hi phro 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #908 20120926 05:04:41
Re: Bafflers?I sure would like to see you duplicate my answer with one of your own. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #909 20120926 20:19:52
Re: Bafflers?Hi stefy,
No, I didn't use the shoelace method...I'm quite sure it was Heron's Formula because although I didn't keep my notes I recall some of the steps I used, and they're the same. I'd given up on the problem until I thought of using Geogebra. "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #910 20120926 21:00:49
Re: Bafflers?
There is a formula for that too. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #911 20120927 10:49:13
Re: Bafflers?Hi Bobby, Last edited by phrontister (20120927 20:16:16) "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #912 20120927 18:10:25
Re: Bafflers?Hi phrontister; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #913 20120927 20:48:47
Re: Bafflers?Hi Bobby,
Hmmm. This is all I know about determinants. "The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."  Ted Nelson #914 20120927 21:02:06
Re: Bafflers?Hi phrontister; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #915 20121003 19:05:24
Re: Bafflers?New Problem: In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #916 20121003 19:10:53
Re: Bafflers?Isn't the pair of equations from the other thread enough? 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #917 20121003 19:28:18
Re: Bafflers?Not for the boss and A. The boss knows that if there was another solution then those equations have to be wrong. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #918 20121014 11:27:37
Re: Bafflers?New problem: In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #919 20121014 20:11:48
Re: Bafflers?Are the dice different? 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #920 20121014 20:18:09
Re: Bafflers?One die is rolled 3 times. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #921 20121014 20:23:57
Re: Bafflers?Oh, okay then. 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #922 20121014 20:29:25
Re: Bafflers?Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #923 20121014 20:46:30
Re: Bafflers?I have a feeling about what might be the next Baffler. 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #924 20121014 20:54:25
Re: Bafflers?You got it! In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #925 20121014 23:29:55
Re: Bafflers?I knew it! 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment 