Mathematics

Hello friends, it has occured to me that I know depressingly little about mathematics in general. I mean, I can do all the stuff in class they want you to do, but I really am not comfortable with any of the stuff. In saying this, I mean that I feel as though there are certain things I haven't learned....probably because they were attempted to be taught to me by southern women entertaining too many children.... Anywise, I was fiddling around with a circle the other day, and I wrote a TI-BASIC program that computes the Pi constant from scratch. If any of you are interested, here is the code (Ti-83 plus): :PROGRAM:CIRCLE :ClrHome :Input "Radius:",R :0-->F :…

Why is it that 1 is not considered a prime?

This may seem completely random, but my roommate and I were having an argument about whether or not there is a set of parabolas that, when paired together, a circle tangent to both of them could be a unit circle. He's positive that it's possible, but I'm not convinced, knowing that parabolas increase at different rates at different times, and a unit circle, being a constant shape and having a constant diameter, could not effectively be placed in between them for infinity. Any ideas? (And if you need clarifications, just ask. It seems a bit confusing, and I'm not in the state of mind right now to fix it.. Sorry! )

I have a vague recolection from Pre-Calculus of learning about unit vectors... Vector "i" and "j"... one of which goes from (0,0) to (0,1), the other (0,0) to (1,0). Does any this ring a bell to anyone? and if so, can you tell me which one is which? I can't seem to find it. I think "i" is (0,0) -> (0,1), and "j" is (0,0) -> (1,0). And, is there one of these for the thrid dimention? (eg, from (0,0,0) -> (0,0,1))

To my knowledge: [math] 3 \cdot 5 = 5 + 5 + 5 [/math] However [math] 3 \, \mathrm{m} \cdot 5 \,\mathrm{m} = 15 \, \mathrm{m}^2 \neq 5 \,\mathrm{m} + 5 \,\mathrm{m} + 5 \,\mathrm{m} [/math] What is wrong?

how do I find the upper and lower bound of this sequence? (2^(n-1))/(n+1)!

Dear Sir , I am in IX std . I felt difficulty in solving these problems . So please help me to solve these . I will be very thankful to you . Q 1 . Factorise the following - x^2+x/4-1/8 Q.2 . (1+3x)^3 is an example of a) monomial b)binomial c) trinomial d) none of these Thankyou

Could anyone be so kind enough to help me with this question and show me the working so I can understand how you got the answer??? I shall have to write the square root as an actual word: square root b squared - c squared, find the positive value of b given a=5.6 and c=4.4. Thankyou ever so much. Nadine

Hey guys, I'm about to take the USAMO. what would you suggest for me to study? -Uncool-

Everything has a pattern e.g. if a coin is flipped there is an equal chance of tails and heads if the coin is fair. If coin flipped 10 times you would expect 5 heads and 5 tails, in reality, randomness stops this from happening. However, if the coin is flipped a million times then there will be a 50:50 split between heads and tails. Does this mean in theory that you could travel in time as there must be a pattern to everything? And as you got further away from present it would be more accuracy as randomness would have less of an effect? THIS IS ONLY IN THEORY!! Are there any problems, in theory, to this?

Absolute Infinity was "conceived" or lets say discovered by Georg Cantor and was considered to transcend all the transfinite numbers and the the set of all sets (paradox). But there was never any explanation to why there couldnt be an end to numbers, to humans, to whoever. Now this might sound like a stupid thread, i might be given explanations "because it just goes on and on and on" well that is true but we couldnt reach Absolute Infinity just by going on and on. Why arent the line of numbers with a start and an endpoint but the "space" of numbers in between the start and end is continuously infinite, transfinite, or Absolutely Infinite? Why isnt there a "Totality" that …

What would you say is the validity of statistics? Also, if you're going to support your argument with definitions please don't, as I think you must ask yourself why you have so much confidence in the definitions in the 1st place I believe the uncertainty just encourages people to not search for the *real* relationship or variables / constants, and it also encourages pointless studies that emphasizes on correlation when the true relationship (if existent at all) is *not* proven. This also goes for probability, however, I heard that probability is quite applicable in quantum physics.

To cut a long story short, as they say , I'm throwing together a kind of "pub quiz" for some friends - it's maths based. The idea is you have to find sums for certain numbers but you're not allowed to use some basic maths operations. Now I just need clarification on something: If you weren't allowed to use subtraction when you're coming up with sums would you still be allowed to use negative numbers? (e.g. -4 + 5) I've never been sure whether, when you do a simple sum like "5 -3" you're doing "+5 - +3" or what you're actually doing is "+5 -3" I've never been sure because you can do sums like " -5 - -3" as well Clarification appreciated!

Hello everyone In math class, we solved the next problem: How many numbers, composed out of 5 different digits, varying from 0 to 6, can be formed? So we concluded that the number of possibilities = [math]6\cdot 6\cdot 5\cdot 4\cdot 3[/math], excluding 0 as first digit. Conclusion: [math]N=6\cdot V^4_6[/math]. Then, suddenly, something came in my head; as we were working with variation formulas, I wanted to put the number of possibilities in a formula, solely using variation formulas; the first thing that came in my head was: [math]V^5_7-V^4_6[/math] My math teacher did some thinking and accepted my resolution (she said it was also a good solution), my …

does anybody have the textbook vector calculus: linear algebra, and differential equations by hubbard and hubbard? if so, do you have any suggestions for the best way to work with it/ the rigor of it etc.

I have a question about something i read here. Why did they choose not to define vector division exactly? They said something about non-uniqueness, and I don't follow. To help me refresh my memory, suppose that we have two lines in an xy plane. For the sake of reality, let the plane be a real plane in real space. An equation for any line in the plane will have the following form: Ax+By+C=0 Suppose we have two lines. [math] A_1 x + B_1 y + C_1 = 0 [/math] [math] A_2 x + B_2 y + C_2 = 0 [/math] We can rewrite the equations as follows: [math] A_1 x + B_1 y = - C_1 [/math] [math] A_2 x + B_2 y = - C_2 [/math] We can rewrite this in …

While trying to learn about rotation matrices I came across this: Quaternion Tutorial If you go to page 15, you will see this: Definition of a Quaternion A quaternion is the geometrical quotient of two vectors. Let A denote a vector, and let B denote a vector. Q = quaternion = A/B Tom Mattson said that vector division isn't defined. Apparently it is.

A (5j+5k), B(3i+2j-k) [math]r=5j+5k+t(3i-3j-6k)[/math] C is perp to r so [math]C is (5i+5j)[/math] O,A,B,D form the vertices of a parallelogram OBAD Find position vector D. How do i do this one? Cheers. As you can see, i've got my exam tuesday morning. I'd appreciate it if you could give me a hand. Thank you.

Hey all, I have two 2D vectors, [math]\vec{s}[/math] and [math]\vec{p}[/math], both starting at [math][0, 0][/math] and ending in the points [math]S[/math] and [math]P[/math] respectively. I'm looking for a vector [math]\vec{x}[/math](starting at [math][0, 0][/math] and ending in the point [math]X[/math]) that satisfies the equation [math]|\vec{s}-\vec{x}| = z \cdot |\vec{s} - \vec{p}|[/math], and that [math]X \in \; \rightarrow SP[/math] (I hope that's the proper syntax for a ray begining in S and going through P). In layman's terms, I'm trying to "zoom in" on [math]S[/math]. Now, the obvious way to solve the problem is find the equation for the ray (or line to be pe…

a vector is given by [math]\vec{v}=\sum_{j=1}^{n}a_j{\vec{i_j}}[/math] where i is the unit vector for a given dimension and n is the number of dimensions of the space in which the vector exists. the magnitude ([math]|\vec{v}|[/math]) is given by [math]|\vec{v}|^2=\sum_{j=1}^{n}a_j^2[/math]. the unit vector in the direction of the vector v is given by [math]\vec{u}=\frac{\vec{v}}{|\vec{v}|}[/math]. if theta is the angle between vectors A and B, then [math]{\vec{A}}*{\vec{B}}={|\vec{A}|}{|\vec{B}|}{\cos{{\theta}}}=\sum_{j=1}^{n}a_jb_j[/math]. [math]\cos{\theta}=\sum_{j=1}^{n}\frac{a_jb_j}{|\vec{A}||\vec{B}|}[/math]. the projection of A on B is [math]Proj_{\vec{B}}{\vec{A}}…

find the point of intersection of the lines x=2t+1, y=3t+2, z=4t+3, and x=s+2, y=2s+4, z=-4s-1, and the find the plane determined by these lines. I don't know what to do...

When adding 2 vectors by the parallelogram method, it seem's obvious that the operation is always commutative, although I'm not sure how to go about constructing a proof of this. When adding >2 vectors is the operation always distributive?

Been a long time since the university years, no books on hand, and with terminology in another language, this may be hard to explain/ask... From a fixed point of view, say the tip of your tv antenna at the roof; -The street hydrant is at a fixed direction; elevation and azimuth. Do not care about the distance. -The sun is at another direction; elevation and azimuth. How is the (bisectriz) bisecting vector elevation and azimuth calculated ? Simply sums divided by 2 ?

I know we have already had a thread here on short cuts but, I found them so usefull and interesting I believed we should compile a method only thread. This thread is only to be used as an area to post vedic style short cuts and not for discussion of them. I would like this to be a resource for all to study and benefit from but that won't work if we fill it with chat. I would ask that any none method posts be removed. Please check before posting that the method is not already covered. Thanks for your help peeps.

I am die-hard fan of maths and like to solve problems in most easiest way possible,because i'm just damn lazy to solve by bigger methods. It seems (overheard) that vedic maths is one such tool which takes us through easiest ways to solve. can i know how? the links related to it? the complete information about it? A complete thread on vedic maths.