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

You are not logged in. #751 20130509 10:38:18#752 20130509 10:40:04
Re: Hangman 1That makes it easy, give me an L. 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. #753 20130509 10:42:39#754 20130509 10:50:51#755 20130509 10:53:05
Re: Hangman 1G then? 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. #756 20130510 10:58:55
#757 20130510 12:14:58#758 20130510 13:11:51#759 20130510 14:29:10
Re: Hangman 1How about a T? 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. #760 20130511 22:29:21#761 20130511 22:31:55
Re: Hangman 1How about an E? 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. #762 20130512 23:59:29#763 20130513 00:31:32
Re: Hangman 1A 'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.' 'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it' 'Who are you to judge everything?' Alokananda #764 20130513 04:07:30
Re: Hangman 1Or maybe an O? 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. #765 20130513 10:47:32#766 20130517 08:31:43
Re: Hangman 1_ a_ Hey. #767 20130517 09:53:27
Re: Hangman 1So there was no O. How about a T? 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. #768 20130519 22:15:19#769 20130519 22:24:45
Re: Hangman 1How about a C? 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. #770 20130519 22:26:23#771 20130519 22:34:31
Re: Hangman 1Is there an F? 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. #772 20130520 04:25:56#773 20130520 04:34:59
Re: Hangman 1A V maybe? 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. #774 20130526 03:00:22#775 20130526 03:05:16
Re: Hangman 1How about an H? 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. 