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

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

Okay.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

point is (5,6)

**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.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

You gave me one whole quadratic and a point, and I asked for the first coefficient of 4 quadratics and a point for each of the quadratics.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

One more is coming.

point ( -2 , 3 )

**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.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

I need 3 more.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

First two are as in the drawing of post #9

**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.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

The points are:

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

Hi;

Please N them for me.

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.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

(-0.0874342, 3.45246) and (2.28743, 2.02754).

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

Is it right?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

That is correct!

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.

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

So, It can be computed!

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

See? I told you!

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

I think you got lucky!

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.

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

Haha!

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

That was funny was it not?

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.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

bobbym wrote:

I think you got lucky!

Let's try another one.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

It takes a long time to come up with these.

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.

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

To be honest it was not.

Because until today,

I thought that the previous problem was intractable.

anonimnystefy

did you use matlab?

*Last edited by Herc11 (2013-06-20 03:08:14)*

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

hi bobbym

Well, either you come up with more problems or you admit I didn't just get lucky. So, what will it be?

Hi Herc11

I used Mathematica.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

Well, either you come up with more problems or you admit I didn't just get lucky. So, what will it be?

Hmmm, did you really think I thought that was luck?!

See post #66.

You used to be someone I could joke with. I am sorry, I did not notice the change. It will not happen again.

I do not see why you say "I told you.?" If you have read my earlier posts I was saying that he needed more equations or more information from post #2.

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.

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

anonimnystefy,

So, if the polynomials were of 3 degree in order to define the intersection points 6 degree 3 polynomials will be demanded?

Is that correct?

Offline

**Herc11****Member**- Registered: 2013-06-19
- Posts: 169

Any suggestions, ideas etc?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,654

Seems like a good place to start.

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.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,840

For equations of 3rd degree you will need more than one point. Two points per cubic should be enough.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline