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

You are not logged in.

## #926 2012-10-14 23:33:37

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Hmmm.

Judge me by my size? When you should not. - Yoda

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.

## #927 2012-10-15 00:19:50

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

The quote doesn't actually go like that, but, anyway... I am not sure how to do a loop like this in Maxima...

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

## #928 2012-10-15 00:27:21

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

That is the quote exactly. Here it means 3, 120, 14000, they are all the same.

What kind of a loop are you talking about?

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.

## #929 2012-10-15 01:37:40

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

I don't think so. Doesn't really matter, though.

A while loop.

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

## #930 2012-10-15 01:55:57

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

I don't think so.

I understand why you feel that way. Although you got the correct answer to the smaller 3 die problem the method you used was cumbersome. You even suspected that. That is why you knew that a a bigger problem would be tougher.

But there is a much better method for both problems. The key is to go back to the smaller problem and find a method that does not use all that casework.

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.

## #931 2012-10-16 02:20:37

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

New problem:

A die is rolled 20 times. What is the probability that the maximum value of the faces is 3?

A says) I still think it is:

B says) Nope!

C says) Seems impossible.

D says) I agree.

E says) I got it!

Hi bobbym,

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #932 2012-10-16 02:25:50

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi gAr;

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.

## #933 2012-10-16 02:29:40

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Thank you, g.fs to the rescue again!

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #934 2012-10-16 02:30:33

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Oh, very good.  I used a different approach. Would you consider showing your gf?

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.

## #935 2012-10-16 02:42:28

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Yeah, sure:

Last edited by gAr (2012-10-16 02:46:24)

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #936 2012-10-16 02:43:27

bobbym

Online

### 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.

## #937 2012-10-16 02:48:31

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi,

So we have the same formula! I'll take a break, see you later..

Last edited by gAr (2012-10-16 02:49:01)

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #938 2012-10-16 02:49:53

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi;

Yes, it just was made from a different method.

Okay, thanks for stopping by.

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.

## #939 2012-10-16 03:52:06

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Nice problem, by the way.

I think I have seen a similar problem in one of your threads, a long time ago.

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #940 2012-10-16 03:57:28

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Probably, some of them I like so much that I have to repeat them.

I am going shopping now, see you later. Can't hold out any longer, there is nothing to eat in here.

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.

## #941 2012-10-16 03:59:20

gAr
Star Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

No one can think with an empty stomach!

See you later.

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  - Buddha?

"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."

## #942 2012-10-16 09:52:12

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi gAr;

Yes, lack of food makes one edgy and mistake prone. Too much food, makes one dull and sleepy.

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.

## #943 2012-11-05 00:08:02

bobbym

Online

### Re: Bafflers?

New problem:

7 poles are erected on a flat piece of land in a line. The first pole is the tallest, with each successive pole being shorter than the one before. The poles are exactly one foot across at the top of the pole. Each pole is positioned so that if it fell over it would not hit the next pole. An ant comes along and climbs up the side of the first pole across the 1 foot top and down the other side. It then travels to the next pole and does the same thing. When it finishes climbing down the last pole it discovers that is has set a new world record for ants of1568 ft travelled. How high are the poles?

A  fact about the poles. They are all integer heights. The poles are 1 foot thick as mentioned before.

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.

## #944 2012-11-05 00:31:56

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi

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

## #945 2012-11-05 00:40:45

bobbym

Online

### 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.

## #946 2012-11-05 00:49:23

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi

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

## #947 2012-11-05 01:04:30

bobbym

Online

### 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.

## #948 2012-11-05 01:12:32

phrontister
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi Bobby,

Last edited by phrontister (2012-11-05 01:18:11)

"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

## #949 2012-11-05 01:14:36

bobbym

Online

### 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.

## #950 2012-11-05 01:16:06

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: Bafflers?

Hi bobbym

Both our answers are heights of tthe poles.

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