|
Grex > Agora41 > #8: Tickle your funny bone even if you aren't a spring chicken | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 257 responses total. |
michaela
|
|
response 50 of 257:
| 
Mar 28 07:01 UTC 2002 |
Not only is that joke bad, but I've heard it (on here even) about twenty
million times.
|
brighn
|
|
response 51 of 257:
|
Mar 28 17:24 UTC 2002 |
#49> Then Jim's car also cost 50% more than his laptop.
|
keesan
|
|
response 52 of 257:
|
Mar 28 19:10 UTC 2002 |
Or 50% less. zero times anything is still zero.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 53 of 257:
|
Mar 28 20:37 UTC 2002 |
Well, no.... zero times one divided by zero is indeterminate.
|
jp2
|
|
response 54 of 257:
|
Mar 28 20:39 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 55 of 257:
|
Mar 28 21:02 UTC 2002 |
Good question, actually. Which rule takes precedence -- multiplication by
zero or no divide by zero?
|
aruba
|
|
response 56 of 257:
|
Mar 28 21:11 UTC 2002 |
"zero times 1 divided by zero" is not, by itself, a meaningful statement.
|
jp2
|
|
response 57 of 257:
|
Mar 28 21:47 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 58 of 257:
|
Mar 28 21:59 UTC 2002 |
It may be somewhere, but not in calculus. There, it is always a limit
process and, for example, lim x--> 0 of sin(x)/x = 1. In fact, whenever
one encounters 0/0 in algebra and calculus, you have to calculate the
otherwise indeterminate value by means of L'Hospital's Rule, or somesuch.
These examples of 0/0 arise from the multiplication of functions that
yield 0 * (1/0), and are quite well behaved, contrary to #56 (or perhaps
this depends on what is meant by "a meaningful statement").
|
vidar
|
|
response 59 of 257:
|
Mar 28 22:14 UTC 2002 |
Math is silly sometimes. 0 is a number used to represent nothing. How
does one divide nothing by anything let along nothing?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 60 of 257:
|
Mar 28 22:21 UTC 2002 |
0 doesn't "represent" anything except a number on the axis of real numbers.
It partakes of the rules of numbers like any other number.
In regard to nothing, half of nothing is still nothing, isn't it? You can
likewise divide nothing by *anything* except nothing and get nothing, but
if you divide it by nothing, you don't know what you get....which is why
it is called indeterminate (numbers for layment 101....).
|
oval
|
|
response 61 of 257:
|
Mar 28 22:26 UTC 2002 |
this is hilarious.
|
jp2
|
|
response 62 of 257:
|
Mar 28 22:57 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
keesan
|
|
response 63 of 257:
|
Mar 28 23:27 UTC 2002 |
Yes, amazing how certain grexers can talk endlessly about nothing.
|
jp2
|
|
response 64 of 257:
|
Mar 28 23:29 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 65 of 257:
|
Mar 28 23:46 UTC 2002 |
If, by that statement, you mean that Sindi's posts are nothing like
your own examples of deathless prose, that's probably more of a relief
to her..
|
keesan
|
|
response 66 of 257:
|
Mar 28 23:50 UTC 2002 |
Sindi is not relieved in any way because she has set up her files so that 64
did not display, whatever it happens to have said. But thanks, Mcnally.
|
aruba
|
|
response 67 of 257:
|
Mar 29 01:28 UTC 2002 |
"lim x -> 0 of sin(x)/x" is a well-defined statement, and can be evaluated.
But 0/0 is not, so it doesn't mean anything. If you ever find yourself
writing down 0/0, it means you were sloppy, and you should back up.
|
jp2
|
|
response 68 of 257:
|
Mar 29 01:36 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
danr
|
|
response 69 of 257:
|
Mar 29 02:16 UTC 2002 |
jp, I'd suggest that you stick to discussing you know something about.
Oh, right. Forget that. We'd never hear from you then.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 70 of 257:
|
Mar 29 02:30 UTC 2002 |
Last I heard, lim x -> 0 of 1/x = <infinity>
|
jp2
|
|
response 71 of 257:
|
Mar 29 02:43 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
bruin
|
|
response 72 of 257:
|
Mar 29 03:10 UTC 2002 |
Foregone Conclusions:
(A) The Japanese eat very little fat and suffer fewer heart attacks
than the British or Americans.
(B) On the other hand, the French eat a lot of fat and also suffer
fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans.
(C) The Japanese drink very little red wine and suffer fewer heart
attacks than the British or Americans.
(D) The Italians drink excessive amounts of red wine and also suffer
fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans.
(E) Conclusion: Eat and drink what you like. It's speaking English
that kills you.
|
remmers
|
|
response 73 of 257:
|
Mar 29 03:11 UTC 2002 |
Re #71, 1st line: It is? I hadn't noticed.
Can you support your claim in #57 that "0/0 is defined to be zero"?
Defined where? For what reason? I'm a Ph.D. in mathematics and am
not aware that this has any wide acceptance as a convention. I *am*
aware of some good reasons not to adopt it.
|
mdw
|
|
response 74 of 257:
|
Mar 29 03:24 UTC 2002 |
It's possible to prove a number of contradictory assertions as to what
the value of "0/0" should be, such as 0,1,+infinity,-infinity,& so
forth. Each of them is equally valid and logical. That is why it's not
a well-defined value. If someone told you to assume that 0/0 is 0, then
they were at best defining a "useful" convention, but that hardly makes
it mathematical fact. It might be good enough for a court of law, and
certainly good enough for any successful politician or journalist, for
whom facts are at best an inconvenience. It still won't build you an
airplane that flies. Those point discontinuities just don't work nearly
as well in practice as they do on paper, as the Enron executives have
discovered to their sorrow.
|