Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Yet another math question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by gt40
    somebody is slightly confused.
    No, he's not. I just had a chance to look at this thread. From the picture in your first post, there's only one equation there, and one substitution.

    R + r*I == R + r*I

    Gurm is Right(tm).

    The problem as you show it is irreducible.
    Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Wombat
      No, he's not. I just had a chance to look at this thread. From the picture in your first post, there's only one equation there, and one substitution.

      R + r*I == R + r*I

      Gurm is Right(tm).

      The problem as you show it is irreducible.
      The problem they are asking is that they want you to solve for r (not R), so you can set the problem up to solve it if they gave you numbers instead of varitiblies. Much like solving a equation for Distance=Time/rate and you need to solve for the rate, which is R=T/D I think

      I corrected the problem just showing the equation without any work done by me, which might be throwing off people.
      Why is it called tourist season, if we can't shoot at them?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Gurm
        Also, SOME people here need to remember that:

        R + r * 2 is NOT the same as (R + r) * 2, not even remotely.
        Some people should read the thread and discover that this was already mentioned.
        Join MURCs Distributed Computing effort for Rosetta@Home and help fight Alzheimers, Cancer, Mad Cow disease and rising oil prices.
        [...]the pervading principle and abiding test of good breeding is the requirement of a substantial and patent waste of time. - Veblen

        Comment


        • #19
          this was my point.
          Yeah, well I'm gonna build my own lunar space lander! With blackjack aaaaannd Hookers! Actually, forget the space lander, and the blackjack. Ahhhh forget the whole thing!

          Comment


          • #20
            Now that you've changed it, it's astonishingly easy. *sigh*

            I = E / (R+r)

            (R+r)*I = E

            R+r= E/I

            r = E/I - R

            (Note that that is (E/I) - R, not E/(I-R)).

            See?
            The Internet - where men are men, women are men, and teenage girls are FBI agents!

            I'm the least you could do
            If only life were as easy as you
            I'm the least you could do, oh yeah
            If only life were as easy as you
            I would still get screwed

            Comment


            • #21
              I know gt40, just clarifying.

              Gurm, thx, that insight was nowhere to be found in this thread before you provided it.
              Join MURCs Distributed Computing effort for Rosetta@Home and help fight Alzheimers, Cancer, Mad Cow disease and rising oil prices.
              [...]the pervading principle and abiding test of good breeding is the requirement of a substantial and patent waste of time. - Veblen

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Umfriend
                I know gt40, just clarifying.

                Gurm, thx, that insight was nowhere to be found in this thread before you provided it.
                Are you being sarcastic? I read through the thread, it was a bunch of people mucking about with substituting something in for itself, and then solving for itself using the substitution of itself.
                The Internet - where men are men, women are men, and teenage girls are FBI agents!

                I'm the least you could do
                If only life were as easy as you
                I'm the least you could do, oh yeah
                If only life were as easy as you
                I would still get screwed

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gurm
                  Are you being sarcastic?
                  Reading posts 11 & 12 I would say that's a roger.


                  Originally posted by Gurm
                  I read through the thread, it was a bunch of people mucking about with substituting something in for itself, and then solving for itself using the substitution of itself.
                  And there we have the definition of algebra.
                  Chuck
                  秋音的爸爸

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X