|
Post the sickest proofs u got
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 04:22 |
|
|
thread => gas
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
BONGHITZ posted:thread => gas
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
False
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
http://math.stanford.edu/~lekheng/flt/wiles.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0211159v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0303109v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0307245v1.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
1+1=windoe
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
can we post open problems w/o proofs????
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
http://www.claymath.org/sites/default/files/navierstokes.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
what is this place?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
math is dumb
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
qed
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
idgi
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
how don yout
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
oh wait now igi
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
it's u!!! oh wait sorry i didn't notice the r
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
it's in the pudding
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:oh wait now igi that's a lotta proofs
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
.99999999999999999 = 1 , OP
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
bump_fn posted:can we post open problems w/o proofs???? sure, maybe we can solve it ~together~
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
this is a long fuker
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
graph posted:.99999999999999999... = 1 , OP ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
http://research.microsoft.com/en-US/people/gonthier/4colproof.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
http://www.marmet.org/louis/induction_faraday/rajaraman380246.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
i have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this post is too small to contain
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
the .9~ = 1 is easy to prove with some basic algebra .9~ = x so 10* each is 9.9~ = 10x minus the original equation leaves 9 = 9x so x is 1
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
I dot think they are the same or they would look the same they might be equivalent but it's like saying "4 is actually just 2+2"
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:"4 is actually just 2+2" this checks out
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:I dot think they are the same or they would look the same they don't have to look the same to be the same number. 2/3 is the same as .666..., just as 3/3 = .999... = 1. also it is completely accurate to say that 2+2 and 4 are the same number, that's what the = between them means
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
I, in all my non knowledge, disagree I thought the whole 1/3 = 0.333 was allowed as an approximation but that 1/3 is a perfect 1/3 while 0.333 is merely a noble attempt it's like, you just cannot completely represent 1/3 as a decimal without compromise other day was wondering if square wave was really just a bunch of sine waves or if rather the square wave could be analysed as a bunch of sine waves but wasn't actually the same thing
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:I, in all my non knowledge, disagree .333 is not the same as 1/3 because the repeating 3s stop after a finite number of them. so yes that's just an approximation. the key is the ..., which means the 3s go on FOREVER. this ... notation is just shorthand for the sum of an infinite series
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
A square wave is a non-sinusoidal periodic waveform (which can be represented as an infinite summation of sinusoidal waves), in which the amplitude alternates at a steady frequency between fixed minimum and maximum values, with the same duration at minimum and maximum. from the wikipedia article on square wave, which led me to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_phenomenon
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
you should go back to Gibbs
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:you should go back to
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:the .9~ = 1 is easy to prove with some basic algebra you've broken the build
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
.9997 = 1
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
0.3 = 0.4
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 04:22 |
|
|
basically it's kind of a weird consequence of defining real numbers (which is intimately related to how you deal with infinite sums). you have no idea how bananas real numbers can be if you just throw away real numbers and try to assume 0.999... != 1 you still get a somewhat consistent system, but it's even crazier this is what mathematical definitions are all about, making choices that lead to the relatively most sensible systems
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:04
|
|