Fun maths question, correlation?

Ronan
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Say i m in the cinema and there are 4 seats. say the closest seat is the
best view which is 4 meters away. say the further the distance away the
worse the viewing quality. eg [5,6,4,9] are the distances of seats away from screen.
Now let's say people sitting in front of you also effects viewing quality.
eg a tall person.

So for the same corresponding seats the level of obstruction (on a scale of 1-10, 1 being small obstruction and 10 being a big obstruction) of the view from people sitting in front of you is now [7,8,9,5]. which seat is the optimal viewing position?

I ask this because of a problem that's hard to explain but is similar to
the analogy i have explained. Maybe I am asking an impossible question but
i m trying to correlate the smallest value of one array with the optimal(smallest)
value of the other array. Is this simply solved by multipling each corresponding
value and then getting the smallest. eg

5*7 = 35
6*8 = 48
4*9 = 36
9*5 = 45

a distance of 5 meters with viewing quality of 7 is the optimal view?
I m guessing there is some kind of mathematical function out there for a question
like this.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
So best obstruction is at worst seat (9m and 5) and best distance is at worst obstruction (4m and 9)
Which is better/more optimal?
 
Mathematics does not prescribe a particular way to optimize for a combination of multiple valuation functions. You have to decide for yourself how "good" or "bad" particular combinations of screen distance and view obstruction are.

There is, however, the concept of "pareto efficiency". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency
 
Ronan,

Looks like the thing you are trying to do is very similar to the calculations of risk assessment where you have a list of hazards and want to best use your resources to mitigate the most loss for the least resource consumption. Each hazard is evaluated for how serious it would be if it happened (potential loss), and for the probability that it might happen. Multiplying the potential loss by the chance of it happening gives values called risks used to rank the hazards against some threshold chosen to distinguish acceptable hazards from hazards to be subjected to mitigating actions (actions which reduce either or both of their potential loss or probability factors) to get their risk values under the threshold.

Do a search on risk assessment and see if that numerical methodology looks like what you are thinking about. :)
 
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...
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top