Share this thread: 
#19
Feb2005, 03:42 AM

P: 16

I'm patiently waiting for somebody to prove me wrong. I don't care if I'm wrong. So, go on. Go and prove me wrong.



#20
Feb2005, 03:49 AM

HW Helper
P: 1,421

Sorry, but I don't understand this... Why 50% = 50/50? This is just terribly wrong, isn't it??
Viet Dao, 


#21
Feb2005, 04:16 AM

P: 696

Please define what it means for a number to "exist within a fraction".



#22
Feb2005, 04:17 AM

P: 16

And, 50/50 = 1 I said, initially. "Decimal 5 = 50 percent. 50 percercent is written 50/50, fifty/fifty." So, the ~ 1, is written as 1, or 50/50. I then said. "Are you closer to 50 percent or one ?" If your closer to 50%, how can the irrational number pi, exist within a fraction ? If your closer to 1, than to 50%, the irrational number pi, can exist within a fraction, or 1. Or course 1 irrational number pi equals itself. Written within a fraction, where it equals 1. Or else 1/1 = 50%, > 1. 


#23
Feb2005, 04:38 AM

P: 181

If you define "exist in" as: [tex] \frac {x * \pi}{y * \pi} [/tex] Pi/Pi = 1. So the only thing that exist in the fraction is x/y...
But I agreed with you; this question is quite confusing. 


#24
Feb2005, 09:55 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,123

x% is defined as x% = x/100
And as for Pi, well: [tex]\pi = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} 4\sum_{r=0}^n \frac{(1)^r}{2r + 1}[/tex] That's how you define Pi without defining it as a fraction (as it can't be defined as a fraction p/q where p and q are integers). Edit: Made a mistake in my defintion of Pi, please note that the mistake is quoted in the post below. 


#25
Feb2005, 06:31 PM

P: 16

Or. (O) The irrational number pi / (O) The irrational number pi And if it cannot exist within a fraction, it cannot equal itself Exist within which fraction ? How about quantum mechanics uncertainty principle. The irrational number pi is a fraction that equals one. The uncertainty principle is uncertain if the irrational number pi, is as I say it is. So it's not uncertain at all. 1 certainly equals 1. Digital quantum mechanics. I'm sorry I can't be more eloquent. But, this is the state of things presently. God does not roll dice. 


#26
Feb2005, 06:46 PM

P: 461

See kids?
LSD isn't as cool as Hunter Thompson makes it seem. 


#27
Feb2005, 06:49 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,123

[tex]\frac{x}{1} = x[/tex] That says nothing about whether or not they are rational. Quantum mechanics is an application of mathematics, its laws are models which attempt to explain how particles work, not numbers. 


#28
Feb2005, 06:55 PM

P: 16

Look at this image.
The definition for "Squared", not "Cubed". The Squared root for pi, in a definition where the irrational number pi may be = 1 or .5 


#29
Feb2005, 07:00 PM

P: 16




#30
Feb2005, 08:30 PM

P: 461

I think this topic should be deleted.



#31
Feb2005, 08:58 PM

P: 16

The real question is. technology, will then not need it. No. It will never need it. But, God does not roll the dice. I'll let the likes of this character DW, i quoted. To play doctor. I really thought u folks would like to read my ideas though, but this character DW, is acting so bad. 


#32
Feb2005, 09:08 PM

P: 16




#33
Feb2005, 09:16 PM

P: 461

Because you're posts don't even have the grammatical construct of an English sentance.
Either a) You just learned English, in which case I apologize for ahving offended you b) You tihnk this is funny, in which case I don't think anyone here agrees or c) You are not mentally rational, and are a danger to yourself and others. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Math Q&A Game  General Math  291  
Fun math game  General Discussion  20  
GROOVY math game  General Discussion  17  
Guessing the quotient of...  General Math  5 