cosine

How did you get it copyrighted? What happened then?

Did I do the exact same thing as you did?

I don't remember the formula exactly, but it definitely was the same concepts you used, so we probably came up with the same result. What happened then? Well the Library of Congress sends you a certificate with your name the title you gave the work and some other details including a reference number of the work. So essentially a copy of it is sitting somewhere deep in some archive of the Lirbary of Congress.

Wow. I believe I've just come up with a new formula for pi. I don't think it's been done before' date=' but just in case, I'll show you and you guys can comment on it:

A circle is essentially a polygon with an infinite number of sides, and so pi would equal the perimeter of the polygon / 2r. If we set the r to 1, then pi = Perimeter/2.

The perimeter of an equilaterial polygon is side length * number of sides. How do we find the side length? Well, we drop two lines from the center of the polygon so that the two lines form an isosceles triangle with the length of one side.

To find the topmost angle of this isosceles triangle, we divide 360 degrees by the number of sides, to get the topmost angle of this triangle. (360/x), if x is the number of sides.

To find the two base angles of the isosceles, subtract the topmost angle from 180 and divide by two, so we have (180-(360/x))/2, which can be simplified to (90-(360/2x))

Now we can use either the sine law or cosine law. Using the sine law, we find the length of 1 side of this polygon is: (remember the radius is 1, thus the two sides are 1)

1/sin(90-(360/2x))=s/sin(360/x), thus s=(sin(360/x))/(sin(90-(360/2x)))

Using the cosine law, we can see that s=sqrt(1^2+1^2-2*1*1*cos(360/x)), simplifying: sqrt(2-2cos(360/x)).

Now we multiply the number of sides (x) by the length of the sides and divide by the diameter of 2:

(xsin(360/x))/(2sin(90-(360/2x))), and (x*sqrt(2-2cos(360/x)))/2

So we can account for when x approaches infinity by using a limit of these functions:

lim x-->infinity ((xsin(360/x))/(2sin(90-(360/2x))))=pi

lim x-->infinity ((x*sqrt(2-2cos(360/x)))/2)=pi

We can also reduce the bottom of the first formula, so get a third limit:

lim x-->infinity ((xsin(360/x))/2)=pi

Well, here's a method (well, 3) for calculating pi using simple trig![/quote']

Haha I did the same thing a few years ago... even got it copyrighted (go ahead, laugh at me!)

 

No sorry its just using algebra to express archimedes method of calculating pi

It would be a much more politically left country, since states on the water frequently vote liberal.

What if it turned out that George W Bush was a woman?

if there are games they should be hardcore nerd games, like chess, balance-the-equation, stoichiometry-funess,

Don't forget the prove Euclid's 5th postulate from the other 4... game.

Then we would be rolling dice everytime we wanted to cast spells, and we would pay homage to the ultimate DM in the sky.

What if there was a word that rhymed with orange?

Meh' date=' I don't know, I'm just not really interested anymore.

 

[EDIT:'] ^^^Well, there you have it. Good job.

Thankyou!

Any hints? Is it a Cesarian cypher?

Darn, how do I upload an image?

Edit, nevermind, here it is:

(Excuse the writing lines in the background, they shift from my digipad to the computer, though my writing skill isn't that great anyway. And on the final line Theta_0 became Theta_2 because its 4 in the morning..., and its the digipad's fault that some L's and one's look like r's)

Dr. Zimski' date=' I assume that you either know the answer to your original question, or you don't care anymore...In what ever case, you did ask an interesting question that is still waiting to be solved by a credible source, and verified. I only offered suggestions in hopes of stimulating the discussion further, and because I thought I might know, but I too am waiting for verification.

 

Does anyone else know? Cosine have you worked it out?[/quote']

Lol, now I must finally do it. I'll work it out now... (post in a few)

 

Hmm okay i just worked it out on paper, i'm uploading it now. (thanks digimemo!)

Gr I still want to know. I might figure it out by hand soon enough. It wouldn't be too hard. Make an infinite sum of the slices of an arc using the formula arc = theta * radius, and then just compare it to how a reimann sum is expressed as an integral, and do the same with the your infinite sum for arclength. Thats similar to how I derived the arclength integral for a function in cartestian co-ordinates a while back, except then I used the pythagorean theorem to measure the small little lengths.

I don't understand what is exactly suprising about ancient homo sapians being able to function in modern society (adjusting environmental factors of course). Society really hasn't changed since ancient times, as much as we'd like to think we aren't barbaric, sometimes we can give ourselves too much credit and our ancestors too little.

If the universe is at all (which it evidently is) it MUST be CYCLIC. The infinite potential theories for what the Cycle specifically is' date=' is irrelevant for this purpose. Can we establish in least that a cycle of some sort exists? I cannot see it otherwise.

 

My confusion is here---- i believe that being cyclic must mean there is no end ever. I'm not trying to be optimistic, I simply cant see it any other logical way. The cycle must continue IN SOME SENSE. ...

 

Finally my concern is, i cannot entirely grasp WHY there cant be an end. Not for absolute certain. It just feels completely wrong. Having no justification nearly equates to blind belief, which i am uncomfortable to harbor.

 

Can you provide input to resolve what i am at loss of?[/quote']

 

Well first I am not sure why you insist the life of the universe must be cyclic.

But, for the sake of arguement, assume that it MUST be cyclic. If this is so, then you are wondering how there could be an end to the universe? If you hold a belief that the universe's life is cyclic (which I don't know why exactly) you can still consistently believe there is an end to the universe by imagining the life cycle be like that of any living organism on earth (the butterfly in particular comes to mind, though substitute your favorite animal).

 

I'm not sure if what I said addresses your concern at all.

Misleading Vividness fallacy. There is no ownership involved in the minimum wage employee/employer relationship. There was no choice of employers or skill set application involved in slavery.

Slavery would be even better for some people because at least in slavery you had to support your laborers. In our system you don't even have to make sure you're supporting them, you just have to pay them the least the government will allow. And what do these workers get in compensation for the decrease in ability to live? They get an illusory concept called "freedom," which barely enables them to do anything since they don't have the resources to move anywhere else (either physically to a richer location, or metaphorically up the ladder through an education).

Well' date=' now you're adding more issues into your argument that weren't there before. Please don't assume that because I argue not to double minimum wage that I'm against universal healthcare, childcare, and public education. [/quote']

 

I didn't mean to imply that. I listed those things for completeness, to show that minimum wage is only one factor of the equation. I have more sense to my arguement than to use logical fallacies.

No, workers should be free to negotiate the price they will work for.

They try to do that through unions. However unionization is hard enough as large corporations consistently try to break up unions by legal and illegal means.

ecoli is going to punch you in the shoulder for me for this strawman. Really, really hard. This is not about murder and slavery, and you can't blame people for complying with laws you don't happen to like.

Murder was too far, but I don't see how slavery is a poor analogy.

Look around you. Poverty has always been around' date=' and our market economy is doing very well. Despite the loss of offshored jobs, despite the low education scores, and despite the minimum wage not being changed since 1997.[/quote']

 

Exactly, poverty has always been around. Does that mean we should force them to stay there? If we don't believe in a decent minimum wage, universal healthcare, childcare, public`education, etc. then we have no right to call ourselves a meritocracy. People in the lower echelons of society are used in a cycle to keep the upper classes absurdly wealthy. The have neither the same opportunities nor chances of their wealthier competitors.

This is not true because the business owners have complied with the law and it's not their fault that employees who took the jobs they were offered don't have a better standard of living. The business owners will pay the lowest amount the employees and the market will let them get away with.

We forgot to make slavery illegal, and people went and traded slaves shamelessly.

The market always figures a way around obstacles when costs get too high. If a job pays so little or is too hard that no one will do it' date=' something will change or the business will die.

[/quote']

 

How can you affirm this at all? We talk about this mysterious hand of the market like it actually exists. It obviously doesn't considering the current situation we're in. Although, maybe this "hand of the market" works in "mysterious ways" that us as mortals would not understand.

 

Edit reason: trying to sound less vehement while still expressing view.

If the minimum wage is increased' date=' then companies that do not wish to pay the minimum wage will move their workforce overseas. Hell, right now companies that don't even pay any minimum wage positions are moving their workforces overseas where they don't have to pay anything remotely close to a fair wage. As a result, the number of jobs available here in the US will drop off and unemployment will go upwards. This will be just as much of a problem as the poverty level is right now. If minimum wage is moved upwards, then any goods and services which rely on minimum wage positions will move up in price also. Groceries will cost more, food will cost more, commerce will cost more. As this cost goes up, then the raises in minimum wage that were given will still not be enough to cover the rising cost of goods and services.

 

It's a difficult thing to balance. Do you want 15% of your population below the poverty line and another 5% unemployed, or do you want 10% below the poverty line but another 10% unemployed?[/quote']

Its ridiculous that our government allows companies to do that. Free trade is going bonkers. We need tariffs and taxes on companies that do that stuff. With all that tax money we could start our own, decently paying jobs.

This is great. I couldn't even imagine that 14 people would be so nice as to spend some minutes on my question.Thanks a lot. Eagerly waiting for more replies. With best regards, gala.

Oh and gala, I think we would all appreciate it if you could post some of the Russian responses you got.

I think it was made very clear in the last few posts that we were indeed talking about minimum wage for kids.

 

And for the others working for minimum wage' date=' posts 4-6 still hold true. What good does it do to raise the wage when costs will go up to compensate?[/quote']

Well there has to be a minimum wage somewhere, because there is a poverty line that needs to be breached. If a business can't afford to keep their workers over the poverty line, then they can't afford workers. They made a bad choice trying to over extend their business. Having 1 job where someone can get by is better than having 2 jobs where nobody can get by. And the current minimum wage isn't anywhere near reaching the poverty line.

then you`de be making a bold statement of the obvious' date=' and we`de still blame Phi, but we`de be gratefull that you`re not on an aircraft

 

what if Miss Perfect was from Tehran in charge of Nuclear materials?[/quote']

Then she would be approached by a Miss Thread Hijacker hoping to get some!

 

What if you could only make one post on SFN a day?

I can't remember how to solve this, any help would be appreciated, thank you.

Haha, it really reminds me of this funny site. Are you sure thats not a right triangle? If not, I'm not sure if there is enough information to solve the problem.

Sorry, but I don't know if you all really think that the only people who are paid minimum wage are kids. Unfortunantely they are not.

Does that offer extend to me as well, ecoli?

Family Guy, Futurama, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Monty Python's Flying Circus, and NPR's What Do You Know (or Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, I can never tell the difference)

Probably school is the best way. There are tons of universities where men and women come together from all over to learn. PLus if you live on campus' date=' that's another way people come together.

 

My parents met on a work study program. My aunt and uncle met in college... I'm wonder how many people have met this way.[/quote']

School is a great opportunity for these things, but only a certain percentage of people go to school, and this would put a huge time pressure on people not ready yet for school. I've had one girlfriend already and that relationship lasted 2 years. I may know to work a little faster now but even at half that rate, that would allow me to try how many different potential partners before graduation? And just finding these type things to begin with takes so much time in itself.