All Answers 358108 Answers

OK, rosala.....

Remember that we can multiply in any order that we'd like......so, for instance, 3*4*5 = 5*3*4

So look at this........ 3*w⁵*7*w⁵   is really just the same thing as 3*7 *w⁵ * w⁵

So we have 21*w⁵*w⁵     ....   and remember by a property of exponents (or powers) that aⁿ * aⁿ = aⁿ⁺ⁿ

Therefore, w⁵ * w⁵  =  w⁵⁺⁵ = w¹⁰

And putting this all together, we get ...... 21w¹⁰

Does that make sense??

I guess this is meant to be csc(3*pi/14).  Use the calculator:

$${csc}{\left({\frac{{\mathtt{3}}{\mathtt{\,\times\,}}{\mathtt{\pi}}}{{\mathtt{14}}}}\right)} = {\mathtt{85.111\: \!752\: \!545\: \!185\: \!742}}$$

CPhill , i dont understand anonymous's question neither ur answer ! pls can u explain it to me if u dont mind !

11pi/6 + 3pi/4 = 7pi/12 

Let's get a common denominator and then add the fractions.

So we have

22pi/6 + 9pi/12 = 31pi/12 

But, notice something....that this is just 

24pi/12 + 7pi/12  .....And 24pi/12 is just 2pi.

So, in effect, 31pi/12 is the same "reference" angle as 7pi/12. We've just added another full rotation (2pi) to 7pi/12...

Does that make sense???

CPhill i dont understand it much nicely how u got 21w¹⁰ ! pls can u explain it to me ! 

As of late, the probability that I get a correct answer on a probabilty problem has been something less than 1, but I'm still gonna' give this one a try.....

The probabilty of picking the first place finisher correctly is just 1/39. And the probabilty of picking a second place finisher correctly (given that we've picked the first place finsher correctly) is just 1/38. And the probability that we pick the third place finisher correctly is just 1/37.

So ....  (1/39)*(1/38)*(1/37)  = 1/54834

Another way to look at this is count all the sets that are possible when we choose any 3 people from 39. But since order matters within the set, we must use a permutation. Thus, (39 P 3) = 54834. And since only one of these sets is "correct," we have 1/54834 chances of choosing this set.

We can arrange the girls in 4! ways = 24 ways, and the boys in 2! ways = 2 ways.

So, 24 * 2 = 48 ways

Thanks, for adding that, Anonymous......yes, I was assuming the same infinity order.........

Georg Cantor may take exception to your answer.

The answer is infinity if both infinities are the same. It is not double infinity! (duh!)

(This posted about one minute after CPhill -- didn't intend to step on your post).

Believe it or not - in general - it's still infinity.......to see this........consider the set of positive even integers on the number line and the set of positive odd integers on the number line. Both sets  are infinite. And if we add them together, the result is just another infinite set - the set of ALL positive integers. This set is also "countable" because we can assign a number to each member. There are also "uncountable" infinite sets. The set of all real numbers that exist between 0 and 1 is an example of an "uncountable" set....!!!!

The perimeter is given by:  2(w + L)....so we have

20 = 2(W + 6)      divide by 2 on both sides

10 = W + 6           subtract 6 on both sides

4 = W

So, the width is 4 meters.

In the scheme of communications, there is nothing like a demonstration of how bad it could be to compel an appreciation of how good it is. In that respect, I withdraw my harsh analogy of “going to h**l to cool off.”

I’ll replace it with, “coming here to learn grammar is like going for a swim in the magma of an active volcano to cool off.”

It requires a fair amount of skill to write something that outrageous and still be comprehensible. It’s a mad, mad, world!

Constable Grammar Numan

Note to kitty 3: My reference to your posts and language skills may have provoked an unwanted contrast. Sorry. Though the pen is mightier than the claw, it does not replace it. If necessary, extend claws and sharpen as required.

----

A subscripted postscript detected. …

--- And who the heck wurries about witch sintence contains a linked up verb??? There ain't no numbers in that, so WE DON'T CARE 'BOUT IT!!!! Let that linked up verb find itself, if'n its lost.......

 ---

… Redirect AI to M5 tie in, reinitialize informational input….evaluate as interrogative… sub-imperative… begin human readable transcription. ---

That was the point in the first place. This is the wrong forum for that question.

Consider this:

Because of the natural redundancy built into human communication, I could understand what you wrote. There may be a few computers that could –very few, at present. One need only look at the language translations sites to see the limitations of computers and their programming in this respect.

To program a computer to solve a math problem requires math and programming skills. To program a computer to correct syntax and grammar requires those two skill sets and at least one other. By logic, this is a more complicated procedure.

Nearly all of the math equations you write are resolvable by a computer. You would – I hate to say it -- have to use the correct syntax. The computer output would be in a form consistent with math syntax. You would understand this output because you understand this “grammar” of math.

For the most part, except for the human communication, Wolframalpha can replace you (irksome thought). That is, though the computer outputs a consistent mathematical grammar, most humans cannot understand it. Yet, these same humans can (maybe) understand even the most (intentionally) butchered human grammar, that you might use to explain it. Some do not even know it is butchered.

Ask a few elementary school students to find out if someone is “smart,” and invariably they will ask math questions. This is true for most adults, too. The concept: if you know math you are “smart.” No doubt, that is true, but it is very incomplete.

The programmers of the elementary students and computers need to use the proper syntax. Unlike the perpetual universal constancy of math, grammar is dynamic; it changes with time. However, if it changes too fast, the older computers will give a “syntax error” and the younger computers will not learn the older grammar, giving an error message: “that does not compute” or “W*F”.

If ye ask m’Lady, she must knowth this to be a truth.

This is a computational observation from the cyber world where chaos in communication is another branch of mathematics. Does this compute?

Dramatis personae: HAL, via M₅ tie-in, Constable Grammar, Constable Grammar Numan, and ye olde M^-1

First, we would look to the third digit to the right of the decimal. If it's 5 or greater, we round the second digit to the right of the decimal up. Otherwise, the second digit to the right of the decimal remains as it is.

And since the third digit to the right of the decimal is "8," we would round the "5" up to a "6."

So we have   ....    7.96

Double infinity duh!!!

Because just think some houses have upstairs=two story houses so he might be asking for the floor space of upstairs and downstairs 

Its a mystery.............

Seriously i have NEVER EATEN A PIE...I always thought they were disgusting

Is this your number puzzle  (is it just +-x and divide and are you sure it is doable)

If this is correct then you do not need to reply- not until you want to answer anyway

6,6,12,35,38,66,104.   Magic number is -912

Closing in 24 hours.

What has the height got to do with the floor space?

how can you not have had a pie!  I think that

$$P(\overline{\mbox{Zegroes has eaten or at least tasted a pie}})\rightarrow0$$

Tuesday 17/6/14

Introductory Calculus (do you think this one might be worth adding to your list Ninja?)

what does your answer come up as?

This  is the introduction to calculus

See if this picture helps

Thank-you, CPhil, Melody, and Alan for taking the time to help out! As always, much appreciated.