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

You are not logged in. #2126 20130216 22:55:04
Re: What do you think?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. #2127 20130216 23:17:20
Re: What do you think?
"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." #2128 20130216 23:26:57
Re: What do you think?Hi; Last edited by bobbym (20130216 23:35:09) 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. #2129 20130216 23:31:28
Re: What do you think?That's an awesome formula! "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." #2130 20130216 23:34:47
Re: What do you think?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. #2131 20130216 23:54:27
Re: What do you think?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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #2132 20130217 00:33:31
Re: What do you think?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. #2133 20130217 00:34:57
Re: What do you think?Okay, I will read your discussion. 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 #2134 20130217 00:35:24
Re: What do you think?Which one will you read? 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. #2135 20130217 00:45:09
Re: What do you think?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." #2136 20130217 00:46:50
Re: What do you think?There is one that is dynamite. It is mine! Look at #10. 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. #2137 20130217 00:52:33
Re: What do you think?Hi, "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." #2138 20130217 00:54:44
Re: What do you think?Yes, that is my problem. Three times a face must show. 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. #2139 20130217 00:58:38
Re: What do you think?Solved using markov chains? "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." #2140 20130217 01:00:41
Re: What do you think?Yes, a 730 x 730 matrix. But I did not solve it, I just proposed it to him. He solved it and emailed me that he would add it to the pdf. Last edited by bobbym (20130217 01:06:11) 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. #2141 20130217 01:07:49
Re: What do you think?It reminds me of your urn 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 “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #2142 20130217 01:08:26
Re: What do you think?Oh, you meant that you proposed the problem, I thought it was yours to solve! "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." #2143 20130217 01:09:13
Re: What do you think?Hi gAr and anonimnystefy; Last edited by bobbym (20130217 01:28:53) 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. #2144 20130217 02:51:39
Re: What do you think?I think I have found a connection of that problem with this sequence. 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 #2145 20130217 02:56:33
Re: What do you think?I am not following what you mean. Last edited by bobbym (20130217 02:57:12) 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. #2146 20130217 03:02:45
Re: What do you think?10th problem from that pdf. The probability that the ith dice will be a third of a number is Binomial[i1,2]/6^(i1) *the (i2)th number of the 6th row of the first triangles in the examples. 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 #2147 20130217 03:04:33
Re: What do you think?Is it the first third of a number? 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. #2148 20130217 03:07:04
Re: What do you think?Third? 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 #2149 20130217 03:09:30
Re: What do you think?That table is giving the probability of the the ith ball being a third one in a box. But is it the first ball to be the third one in any box or could there be others? 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. #2150 20130217 03:15:57
Re: What do you think?The table doesn't give the probability. To get the probability you need to multiply by Binomial[i1,2]/6^(i1) 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 