For all numbers n, N* = 32-n. (n*)*

  • Thread starter Thread starter danacarr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the calculation of N* = 32 - n and the interpretation of (n*)*. Participants debate whether n* is equivalent to 32 - n and how the operation "*" should be understood. One interpretation suggests that performing the operation twice leads to n, while another considers the possibility of exponents, proposing that n* could also represent 1/32^n. Clarification is requested to ensure accurate understanding of the definitions and operations involved. The conversation highlights the need for precise definitions in mathematical expressions.
danacarr
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
How do you calculate:

For all numbers n, N* = 32-n.

(n*)*
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Is "N" the same as "n"?

If you mean that n* is defined as 32- n, then "*" just means "subtract n from 32". Doing it twice, (n*)*= (32-n)*= 32- (32-n)= n.
If that is not what you mean then I think you need to clarify.

Hmm, but that doesn't have any thing to do with exponents. Do you mean that n* is defined as 32-n? That is, of course, the same as /frac{1}{32^n}. Doing that twice,
(n*)*= 32^{-\frac{1}{32^n}}
which is 1 over the 32n root of 32.

I have a feeling that is also not what you meant. Please clarify!
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top