D'Nalor

Thanks, the info was helpful, but the video wouldn't let mewatch it because I don't livein the US. I still need a bit of info on Julia sets as well, the sites haven't given any info on them.

I looked at the sites, but the first site wasn't particullary helpful (I want to know what a fractal actually is), and the second isn't very friendly for High School students(which I am). I appreciate the help, but it isn't really what I need.

I have an assignment on Fractals, but I am unable to find much helpful info on them (research based assignmnet, it wasn't that I wasn't paying attention in class). just a brief deffinition will be sufficient. Thanks if you can help. info on mandelbrot sets and julia sets would be nice too if you can give me some.

I had the following question in a maths exam the other day

[math]xy = 10[/math] and [math]x^2 + y^2 = 61[/math]

HOW DO I DO THIS, IT'S DRIVING ME MAD BECAUSE I CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT!

I tried just the primitive guess and check method, but IT DIDN'T WORK!

can you please give me some help?

Ok, I understand that much, that's explained on Wiki, but what if we have a 3 by 3 matix and a 2 by 2 matrix? what then?

okay, I understand logaritims better now.

Another thing that I didn't quite get from the wikipedia matrix page is kronecker product, it uses two 2-by-2 matricies, and that makes its explanation a bit weird. can someone please give me a better example, and also tell me how to do that with *normal* (what they teach you in lower high school) numbers?

I'm selecting advanced mathematics for one of my senior high school subjects next year... I should do well according to my teachers...

Well... do you understand inverse functions?

 

I.e. [math]f^{-1}(f(x)) = x[/math]

 

Like [math]\arcsin{(\sin{x})} = x [/math]

 

or [math]\sqrt{x^2}=x [/math]

 

will logarithms are the inverse functions of exponentiation.

 

[math]\log_n{n^x} = n^{\log_n{x}} = x[/math].

[math]f^{-1}(f(x)) = x[/math] does that mean thae same as [math]f^{-1}(fx)[/math]? I understand that well enough.

I haven't come across arcsin yet, can you explain that?

[math]\sqrt{x^2}=x [/math] I understand too.

[math]\log_n{n^x} = n^{\log_n{x}} = x[/math]? Can you go over that again, explaining it a bit more, please? I don't really understand that.

Booker, I didn't find that website very helpful, it was a bit too confusing.

I don't know about the intelligence thing. a well trained dog is more intelligent than a baby, and we call babies human beings.

I Don't think that that really matters. infinity is just a concept, and [math]0.\overline{0}1[/math] is also a concept. infinity doesn't exist because once you try to write it out, you'll never be able to finish, because you'll be able to write in at least one more digit. [math]0.\overline{0}1[/math] is like that, exept you just keep adding 0s in between the decimal point and the 1.

Ok, maybe we're looking at this the wrong way. what is [math]0.\overline{0}1[/math] as a fraction. It should be 1 divided by infinity(I haven't figured out how to draw that yet, any help?). that should be right. by the same princible, that would work with any number as the numerator, with that number on the end insteed of 1.

If [math].\overline{9}[/math] means [math].9[/math] followed by an infinite number of zeros by definition of infinite there could not be a [math]5[/math] or a [math]1[/math] on that because the series of [math]9's[/math] is never ending.

[math].\overline{9}[/math] doesn't mean 0.9 followed by an unending string of zeros, it means 0.9 with an unending string of nines. the point of this thread anyway is to enquire into the possiblility of the ridiculously small number [math].\overline{9}[/math]1 .

does it or does it not exist, and if it does not exist, should it?

Why do we call ourselves human beings? we do not call dogs 'dog beings' or cats 'cat beings', so why do we call ourselves human beings?

Thanks. I think I can understand the Matrix mathematics now, but I'm not so sure on the lorgarithms. maybe I'll just ask my Maths teacher about those...

If 0.9(recurring)5 is meaningless, then why do I understand what it means? I know that although the acctual number is impossible(or improbable), isn't the number i (the square root of -1) in physics also an impossible(or improbable) number?

(by the way, Kyrisch, nice paradox)

I am a year 10 student. This is not acctually homework, but I want to know how to do logaritims and matrix mathematics. can someone try and explain this to me?

0.0recurring1 may be a bit meaningless, but it's the difference between 0.9recurring and 1

Since 0.9recurring is equal to 1, 0.0recurring1 is equal to zero.

0.9recurring is not equal to 1, it is just a tiny bit smaller than 1, but the difference is so small it is just considered to be 1.

I thought that time might exist as particle, and thought that I'd come up with some reasonable proof. then again, I know next to nothing about quantum physics, and I haven't left school yet. I'm dissagreeing with the people who said that time is only a dimension, and I only read the month and day, not the year.

Is it at all possible to have the number 0.0(reoccuring)1? or for that matter any other number at the end? my idea is that the number is 0.0 with an uneding string of 0s on the end, but if it did have an end, it would end in 1.

Is this possible?

I Disagree with your comments. It is entirely possible for time to exist as both a particle and a dimension. Light, I belive is the highest naturally occuring density of Time occuring in our dimension(other than being a form of energy, after all energy is movement and movement is time). This agrees with Einstein's beleif that when any object goes faster than the speed of light(see above braceted area), It will travel backwards in time(the natural state of all things is a sphere, therefore time is also a sphere, and If you travel far enough in one direction, you will arrive at a point behind where you started). Therefore, if you somehow infuse all atoms in your body with an excess in Time, you will travel backwards. by the same princible, removeing all Time will cause the rest of time to pass you by.

also(though I'm not so sure about this), have you ever been standing by the side of a road when a car passes by? If you have, you'll remember that the car passes, and then you feel the air rush past afterwards. this is because the car takes particles of Time from the air around it, so the car moves faster(and slows down time slightly for the contents) and the air, laging behind a bit is not moving as fast as the car(because of its lack of Time).

I hope this answer is satisfactory. I have found no error over the many hours I have thought this over(incidentally before I read this), and if you can find error, please notify me, as this theory is in its developmental stage.