math riddles...

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

    #16
    Simple (non scientifice) way:
    1. Take a calculator
    2. type: 0.999999999 [+] 1 =
    3. type: - 1 =

    Most calculators will round it up to 1.

    Comment

    • thop
      Super MURCer
      • Mar 2001
      • 2536

      #17
      we use 0.3 with a line over the three, looking like:

      _
      3
      no matrox, no matroxusers.

      Comment

      • Umfriend
        Crabby Smurf
        • Mar 2001
        • 7308

        #18
        OK, prove mathematically that
        ~_
        0.9 = 1 (the ~ is there to align the _)
        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

        • GNEP
          Super MURCer
          • Feb 2002
          • 5241

          #19
             _
          0.1 = 1/9
             _     & nbsp;_
          0.9 = 0.1 * 9 = 9/9 = 1
          DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

          Comment

          • Umfriend
            Crabby Smurf
            • Mar 2001
            • 7308

            #20
            Oops, that one is simpeler than mine and can't be refuted (mine could, at least in words) AFAICS. Congrats......
            Umf (sulking that it is even simpler than I thought for over 17 years...... )
            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

            • GNEP
              Super MURCer
              • Feb 2002
              • 5241

              #21
              Can anyone remember that old "proof" that one of my maths teachers used to use that showed 63=64 or something??? That was amusing.
              DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

              Comment

              • Umfriend
                Crabby Smurf
                • Mar 2001
                • 7308

                #22
                No, but I'd love to get to know that one...
                Umf
                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

                • SitFlyer
                  Super MURCer
                  • Aug 2002
                  • 7178

                  #23
                  This seems interesting:

                  Theorem : All positive integers are equal.
                  Proof :
                  Sufficient to show that for any two positive integers, A and B, A = B.
                  Further, it is sufficient to show that for all N > 0, if A and B (positive integers) satisfy (MAX(A, B) = N) then A = B.
                  Proceed by induction.
                  If N = 1, then A and B, being positive integers, must both be 1. So A = B.
                  Assume that the theorem is true for some value k. Take A and B
                  with MAX(A, B) = k+1. Then MAX((A-1), (B-1)) = k. And hence
                  (A-1) = (B-1). Consequently, A = B.

                  Comment

                  • GNEP
                    Super MURCer
                    • Feb 2002
                    • 5241

                    #24
                    Found something similar to what I was looking for:

                    a = b
                    a^2 = a*b
                    a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
                    (a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
                    (a+b) = b
                    a+a = a
                    2a = a
                    2 = 1

                    Spot the flaw
                    DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

                    Comment

                    • Umfriend
                      Crabby Smurf
                      • Mar 2001
                      • 7308

                      #25
                      Sitflier, assume N=2 and you will find that at least one of A and B equals 2, but not necessarily both.

                      GNEP, from line four to line 5, u r dividing by zero.... (right?)

                      Imf
                      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

                      • GNEP
                        Super MURCer
                        • Feb 2002
                        • 5241

                        #26
                        Umf - yup. a=b therefore a-b=0.
                        DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

                        Comment

                        • SitFlyer
                          Super MURCer
                          • Aug 2002
                          • 7178

                          #27
                          Given
                          there is a camel
                          there are 3000 bananas at point A.
                          you want to get them to point B.
                          The distance between point A and point B is 1000 miles.
                          The camel can only carry 1000 bananas at a time,
                          and the camel eats 1 banana every mile.

                          The question is how many is the Maximum Bananas can you get to point B via the Camel.

                          Comment

                          Working...