Why is the time changing? I don't know where you are getting this. It is a static time. Each step takes one whole day. yes, % wise compared to the total, the % goes to zero over infinity, but the actual length of each step is 1 day, no more no less. Your same logic would mean that in a finite series step1 : 1 hour step2 : 1 hour would mean step1 : 1 hour/2 step2: 1 hour/2 I am really surprised you are making this logical leap.
Time is moving forward toward infinity. It can never get there, otherwise it wouldn't be infinite. So proportionally the amount of time it took to do a single thing goes to zero. So from the perspective of infinite, it is zero. That isn't a logical leap, that's just logic. And if the proportion is zero, then the thing that made it up must be zero. That isn't a leap. That's also logic. Thus the sum of all of those things would be zero. If in, fact, the proportion (%) is zero. But if it is just very, very small, then it is still infinite.
There is an ignore feature. It costs like $10. Or $10 in pounds, whatever that is. I have not bought it. And now I never will. Posts per page not really supported. The way Xenforo does paging, is built into the URL. If we changed how many posts were on each page, it would break all the URLs.
Thank you for your quick and pointed response; also thank you for forever forcing me to see the Mathematics thread as I'm 99.99999999% sure you guys are never coming to an agreement.
But using my finite example, you would never say that the task that took you 1 hour to complete yesterday really only took 1/2 hour because proportionally it is half of the total time.
Well, since I continue to see this thread, I'll make a contribution, although I won't be able to debate it... will just leave it up to the nerds.
Welcome to the 8th. Visit regularly. We're especially fun in the off season. This is also an exact word for word debate we had .. 4 years ago? But as I said, welcome to the ocho.
One of you math pros throw another topic(s) on the fire here so we don't have to think about the coaching search all day....
What is really bizarre is that when physicists use that sum it gives the correct outcome of their calculations.
With more beaing ascertained about the intelligence of animals (e.g. crows), I think we will soon realize that math is the primary factor separating us from our relatives. It's also, IMO, the branch of academics that separates the wheat from the chaff. It's a good thing that doctors, for example, have to demonstrate proficiency. And I say this as someone who wanted to be a doctor but couldn't hack it in high school calculus.
What is division? It is really just an iteration of subtraction. 1|2 is the same as saying 2-1= 1 1-1= 0 So therefore the answer for 1|2 is 1r0. Traditionally. Because traditionally we stop when the remainder is less or equal to 0 and less than the divisor. But this is not the only way it can be done. 1|2 can also be 2-1 = 1 therefore the answer is 1r1. Or even 1|2 2-1= 1 1-1=0 0-1= -1 So the answer to 1|2 is 3r(-1). All three answers are valid and viable and follow the same process. So a generalized program for division can be states as follows: Take q|p where q is the divisor and p is the dividend (read as p divided by q, or in fraction form p/q). The answer will be of the form b + a R c - aq where b is the number of subractions needed so that the remainder, c is 0 <= c < q, a is the number of steps after b we stop. Let us take our examples above, where our problem is 1|2 Traditionally for all division we would set a = 0 2-1=1 1-1=0 Answer: 2 + a R 0 + 1a = 2+0 R 0 + 1(0) = 2R0 Let a = 1 (we will be going one more iteration than b into the process) 2-1=1 1-1=0 0-1=-1 Answer = 2 + 1 R 0 – (1)(1) = 3R(-1) Let a = -1 (we will be stopping one short of b in the process) 2-1 = 1 Answer: 2 + (-1) R 0 – (-1)(1) = 1R1 We can verify this by doing the following: 2/1 = 2 (the answer we get when a = 0) 2/1 = 3 – 1 (same as a = 1) 2/1 = 1 + 1 (same as a=-1) Normally when long division is done, we put everything in one set of columns: 2 1|2 2 ____ 0 But this is unwieldy for any a != 0. Therefore, we will have one column for the division part (the subtraction) and one column for the outcome (the addition). In the left column we will show each iteration of subtraction with Z# where # is the number of the iteration. Left hand is the 1|2 Z1 = 2 Z1= 2 __ 0 Let’s try 1/2: 2|1 .0 Z1=0 Z1=0 Z2=.5 ____ _____ 10 .5 Z2=10 ___ 0 Here we see for Z1, 2 goes into 1 zero times. We subtract 0 from 1 and get 1 and bring down the 0 from the tenths place above. Z2, 2 goes into 10 5 times, and for the addition column we put this number in the tenths place of the decimal position because that is where the right most digit in the 10 was from. Add Z1 and Z2 and get the answer of .5, and since the remainder is 0<= r < divisor, we see that we stop. Alan, what is all this crap? Well, I am trying to explain what the next few pictures will show as the forum is not conducive to writing mathematical equations. And I am trying to provide an answer to a question that FlOat issued about showing a p/q such that the decimal expansion is .9… The first set pictures will show how 1/3 can be expanded using the method and it will provide .3… for each value of a given. The next pictures will show 1/1 and how if a >= 0, it will provide 1, if a < 0, it will provide .9…
