Mathematics

Hi everyone! Lately at school we've been dealing with logarithmic inequations and they seem pretty tricky. So I was wondering if anyone could add a link or just post some useful hints that would help solving these inequations. I'd appreciate any kind of help!

If you can have commutative properties for an axiom such as A+B is equal to B+A does this mean physically in reality that at some extent all physical objects must at least have one thing in common? I mean A could be bob and B could be ann so you could say bob and ann is here and ann and bob are here right? On that note should you would not say annbob is here or bobann is here, so does equality in this sense merely apply to this existence in knowledge of bob and ann? Or what else is so fundamental about A+B=B+A that it can pertain fully or correctly to physical reality? Because to me for it to reach equality in another sense then applies at least a scope or scale to t…

Zero is equal to or greater than infinity......Right? wrong?

Can you get pi anywhere on the Klein bottle or are the two related in any way? I am just wondering being I don’t know much about the Klein bottle but I am wondering overall if it has any connection to irrational numbers then of course I though about pi.

How do you find the greatest common factor of a series of numbers with decimals?

Hi! I'm new here, and I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but here I go: I'm studying some maths and physics and I'm taught about the characteristics of the things but not about the reason why things are, this matter is considered up to my self so I speculate... Is there any relationship between the complex numbers and any rotational movement or something? is the "complex thing" related with any circumference specularly symmetric to the unitary one, but directing its ratio to the inside sense of rotational axes, such vectorial products...? in this situation I'm thinking of I'd understand the negative value of the square of "i"...What do you think about the…

Some time ago I came across a description of a numbering system for some very large numbers (mind boggling, in fact) that involved numbers written within triangles, squares, and circles. I know it was a shorthand for some exponential calculation, but can't remember exactly what it was, and I can't find the reference - it was in a random book in my local library. Any help? Thanks in advance.

Is 1+1 always 2? I tried to prove that 1+1 is not always 2 with applying Goedel's incompleteness theorem as; http://hecoaustralia.fortunecity.com/incompleteness/incomplete.htm

Gauss's law describes the electric field created by the point charge. This law is applied when the point charge is isotropic only. Do you think it's a trivial matter? I don't think so. I tried to extend Gauss's law to the case when the point charge is not isotropic in the following site; http://hecoaustralia.fortunecity.com/gauss/gauss.htm

When it comes to using relational operators on scalar values, there's usually no problem. But what about vectors? Are there any generally accepted rules or consensus when it comes to relational comparisons (ie. =, <>, >, <, >=, <=) of vectors? For instance, consider v1 < v2 for the two vectors v1 = (10, 8) and v2 = (5, 10)... Does one then compare the x and y values pairwise and return a boolean for each value, in this case (false, true)? Or does one check the magnitude of the vectors against each other and simply return (false)? Or something entirely different...? Cheers, Michael

Does anyone know what the steps are to get "h" at just one side of the "=" sign? It's an equation from a physics book whih I just can't work out how the answer h is arrived at. t1 = 0.69s & t2 = 2.37s g =9.81m/s h =(h+0.5gt1^2)/t1)t2 - (0.5gt2^2) The answer is h = 8.02m Many thanks G56

simple yes or no ramsey say the axiom of reducibility is he right or wrong russell wittgenstien and others say the axiom id invalid are they right or wrong Poncicare Russell and philosophers say impredicative statements are invalid are they right or wrong

(X¡ôN)¡ê(XX) Now take X to be N, and we have the contradiction (N¡ôN)¡ê(NN) Known of these was given by Russell himself in 1919 and concerns the plight of the barber of a certain village who has enunciated the principle that he shaves all those persons ans only those persons of the village who do not shave themselves. The paradoxical nature of this situation is realized when we try to answer the question, "Does the barber shave himself?" If he does shave himself, then he shouldn't according to his principle; if he doesn't shave himself, then he should according to his principle. Other attempts to solve the paradoxes of set theory look for the trouble …

given (3?3)?3?3?3=29 using + - / x only once

(Before you read this, you better read the former thread, in this forum, under the same tittle) Continuing the first thread, now I'll give you more tables that are filled with numbers only 1 to 40, so it won't much hurt your eyes. Thus many rows are blank. I put the file in .xls format at: http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=171338&sid=dbfa1e1099d59aa7b0714fb0b192b6e4 Tables 1-20 in sheet #1 & #2, are same as before and have been corrected some (of mistyping), Tables 21-32 in sheet #3, Tables 33-44 in sheet #4,...,Tables 273-284 in sheet #24, Table Total Amount in sheet #25. I name and arrange the tables just like that, though you can …

Complet text of the proof All wholes numbers in the next are given in the prime base [math]n[/math]. Here are the known positions, repeatedly discussed on the mathematical forums. Thus, let (1°) [math]A^n+B^n = C^n[/math], where prime [math]n > 2[/math] and [math]A, B, C[/math] have no common factors. Let for the moment the number [math]ABC[/math] is not divided by [math]n[/math]. Then: (2°) [math]C^n-B^n=(C-B)P[/math], where [math]C-B=a'^n, P=a''^n[/math], [math]C^n-A^n=(C-A)Q[/math], where [math]C-A=b'^n, Q=b''^n[/math], [math]A^n+B^n=(A+B)R[/math], where [math]A+B=c'^n, R=c''^n[/math], [this follows from the simple lemma: if the numbers […

How do I graph a parabolic equation on a graph? for example 2x^2-3?

I had a question in a recent exam that asked you to prove the formula to calculate the sum of an A.S. I only got 2/11 on it so i was wondering if someone could tell me it. I have searched the internet for one but all seem to be a bit rubbish and i think i can get better results here

HEY guys I am stumped could someone please tell me how long it takes light to travel 1 foot and 2 feet I know its in the millionths of a second but I cannot figure it out I must have the IQ of a penny thanks in advance...

Can someone please explain to me what complex numbers are?

For the following function, C computes the cost in millions of dollars of implementing a city recycling project when x percent of the citizens participate.C(x) = 1.5x divided by 100-x any one know how to solve this

Prove that the numbers 49, 4489, 444889, 44448889,..... obtained by inserting 48 into the middle of the preceding mumbers are squares of integers. Please give a formal mathematical proof involving Arithmetic progression or Geometric progression, not just verification.

I was playing around with my calculator trying to draw shapes on the graph and I have a question. As it enumerates through the various values, for say an equation that I graph, is there anyway after the fact of the equation to tackle any element in the list? I don’t have any real clue as to how to go about such or even if its possible. Does the graph just proceed and or execute from the opening argument with no ability to grab an element in the list after the fact. I mean in comp sci you have operators that can allow you such a luxury so I think they would exist in math. Would it be only possible by the constructing your initial equation or equations for that matter…

In the attached equation, is there any way to analytically solve for x?

I know that infinity is indefinite, and thus could be regarded as not being a number. With that, I realize that attempting to perform any arithmetic operations on infinity(other then 1/infinity, but that technically isn't an arithmetic operation either, though it looks like one) is both futile and meaningless. I thought that the limit of f(x)=x^(0.5) or (x+(x+4)^0.5)^0.5 is infinity as x approaches infinity. However, the graph of y= x^0.5 appears to have an horizontal asymptote (it does however, appear to be indefinite) Why is there such an asymptote? Is the square root of infinity some other indefinite constant which is not infinity? Or is the square root still infi…