/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13421272

33KiB, 463x489, Soyjak(154).gif

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

????

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 22:42:24 2021 No.13421272 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13421283 >>13421375 >>13421405 >>13421413 >>13421481 >>13421734

>Multiplication is NOT repeated addition
>Exponentiation is NOT repeated multiplication
>Modulus is NOT the remainder function
So what are they then?
>inb4 some faggot copes by using math jargon like "fields" or some shit.
Explain it simply. You should be able to do that if you really understand it, right Anon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 22:44:38 No.13421283 Report

Quoted By: >>13421313

>>13421272
>Multiplication is NOT repeated addition
>Exponentiation is NOT repeated multiplication
>Modulus is NOT the remainder function
Who says they're not? In $\mathbb{N}$ they clearly are.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Wojak.png, 788KiB, 1004x904

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 22:52:56 No.13421313 Report

Quoted By: >>13421319 >>13421413 >>13421445

>>13421283
>In $\mathbb{N}$ they clearly are.
How about $\mathbb{R}$ , pseud?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 22:55:13 No.13421319 Report

Quoted By: >>13421388

>>13421313
undefinable reals don't exist
change my mind

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:14:15 No.13421375 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421272
Fields or some shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:19:13 No.13421388 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421319
Wow why do you even care

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:28:09 No.13421405 Report

Quoted By: >>13421414

>>13421272
Multiplication is scaling

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:33:17 No.13421413 Report

Quoted By: >>13421422 >>13421448

>>13421272
>Multiplication is NOT repeated addition
Simple. How would you multiply 6 x 3.141... by means of repeated addition? Similarly for exponentiation.

>Explain it simply. You should be able to do that if you really understand it, right Anon?
No, there's nothing really to explain here and whatever is to be explained, has already been implied by >>13421313.

I'm tired of failing high-schoolers regularly shitting up this board with fucking stupid questions that you could answer with any google search. If you're too stupid to get numbers right, maybe just don't deal with mathematics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:33:29 No.13421414 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421405
>t. only seen positive reals

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO normanportrait2014_1.jpg, 15KiB, 355x238

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:38:11 No.13421422 Report

Quoted By: >>13421469

>>13421413
>How would you multiply 6 x 3.141...
I don't know, how about you show us? Brainiac?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:48:37 No.13421445 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421313
Multiplication of rationals is intuitive. Multiplication of reals is then simply the result of assuming that the operation ought to be continuous.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:50:29 No.13421448 Report

Quoted By: >>13421469

>>13421413
>How would you multiply 6 x 3.141... by means of repeated addition?
uhh... i would add 3.141... 6 times....

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Jul 2021 23:58:34 No.13421469 Report

Quoted By: >>13421474 >>13421482 >>13421510 >>13421685

>>13421422
>>13421448
I haven't thought through the example.
Make it with 3.141... x 3.141...
Then do it with repeated addition only... Good luck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:00:37 No.13421474 Report

Quoted By: >>13421517

>>13421469
Are the two 3.141...'s the same number?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:01:55 No.13421481 Report

Quoted By: >>13421507

>>13421272
Kek the shit you guys come up with.. yes multiplying is like a series of additions but not really. Holy shit please remove your self from the classroom. Go sit in the hall.

Realizing it is just addition is the first step to understanding it but you gotta be dense to stop there. For one, 3*4 for example is both 3+3+3+3 or 4+4+4. Those things however are totally different inherently. Adding by threes is not adding by fours. So while multiplication itself has a commutitive property it isn't commutitive with addition. And when you multiply negatives or decimals it is definitely not addition

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:02:01 No.13421482 Report

Quoted By: >>13421517

>>13421469
You use the algorithm we all learned in elementary school which is based on repeated addition combined with an understanding of what decimals mean.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:10:18 No.13421507 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421481
>3+3+3+3 =
>(3+1)+(3+1)+(3+1)=
>4+4+4
Lmao retard

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20210721-191044_Samsu (...).jpg, 423KiB, 1292x1799

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:10:57 No.13421510 Report

Quoted By: >>13421521

>>13421469
thing like this

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:13:54 No.13421517 Report

Quoted By: >>13421537

>>13421474
Doesn't matter.
>>13421482
A simple procedure.
Let's do 0.5 x 1.5 = 0.75
We may break it up into 0.5 x 1 + 0.5 x 0.5
How do you come up with the end result, more explicit the second term, by using addition (of whole units/integers) only? Turns out you can't without having to rely on some implicit model of multiplication. You have to calculate 0.5 x 0.5. To calculate 0.5 x 0.5 by the simple addition of whole units only, you have to multiply it with 10, ultimately resulting in 5 x 1 + 5 x 0.5. The end result will be 7.5 which one has to divide by 10 to come up with the correct result of 0.75.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1626544535268.jpg, 39KiB, 704x480

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:14:58 No.13421521 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421510
which, by the way gives 2 correct decimals with only 5 terms

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:18:11 No.13421537 Report

Quoted By: >>13421570

>>13421517
5×5 = 25 by repeated addition.
.5×.5=.25 by the above plus correctly understanding decimals as fractions

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:30:10 No.13421570 Report

Quoted By: >>13421584

>>13421537
>.5×.5=.25 by the above plus correctly understanding decimals as fractions
Let's consider the field of all rational numbers, $\mathbb {Q}$ . Any number of this field can also be expressed as $x/y$ where x and y are integers and the rational number x/y = a is such that $x = a*y$ . If we're talking about addition and repeated addition, I generally consider these to be additions of whole or negative numbers only. As soon as we're talking about rational numbers, the concept of division and multiplication is inherent to the very definition of these numbers. You can't calculate 0.5 x 1.5 by simply adding whole numbers. You have to introduce a new operation and a new field to make that work. That's why I talked about how such calculations (of rational numbers), even if you break them up nicely, still require division and multiplication as concepts distinct from and not derivable from addition/substraction.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 00:38:09 No.13421584 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421570
(a/b)×(c/d)=(ac/bd) (exercise)
Therefore 5/10 × 5/10 = 25/100

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Mhm.jpg, 33KiB, 657x527

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:21:55 No.13421685 Report

Quoted By: >>13421689

>>13421469
(a+b)(c+d)=(a+b)c+(a+b)d
3.141... = 3+.1+.04+.001+...
3.141... x 3.141... = 3(3+.1+.04+.001+...)+.1(3+.1+.04+.001+...)+.04(3+.1+.04+.001+...)+.001(3+.1+.04+.001+...)+...
>inb4 What is 1/10x1/10 in repeated addition?
10x10 (i.e. 10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10) but we put a 1/ above the answer.
>What is 4/100 x 1/10 then?
4(1/100x1/10) or 4 over (100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100) or 0.004.
So to answer your question we have $[(3+3+3)+(.1+.1+.1)+(.04+.04+.04)+(.001+.001+.001)+\dots]+<br /> [(.1+.1+.1)+\frac{1}{10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10}+\frac{4}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{1}{1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000}+\dots]+<br /> [(.04+.04+.04)+\frac{4}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{4}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{4}{1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+\dots}]\dots$
or if you like $[(3+3+3)+(.1+.1+.1)+(.04+.04+.04)+(.001+.001+.001)+\dots]+[(.1+.1+.1)+\frac{1}{10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10+10}+(\frac{1}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{1}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{1}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100}+\frac{1}{100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100+100})+\frac{1}{1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000+1000}+\dots]+\dots$
This comment is getting long but I trust you get it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:24:57 No.13421689 Report

Quoted By: >>13421695

>>13421685
>This comment is getting long
>comment
oof, you blew your cover at the last second, brother

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO download.png, 5KiB, 199x254

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:29:03 No.13421695 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421689
>oof
Lmao you shouldn't be one to talk

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:42:23 No.13421734 Report

Quoted By: >>13421743

>>13421272
>Modulus is NOT the remainder function
Go compare -1 mod 5 and -1 % 5 . They aren't the same. The world doesn't owe you simpler explanations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:48:47 No.13421743 Report

Quoted By: >>13421750

>>13421734
>The world doesn't owe you simpler explanations.
>Translation: I don't know bro, I just blindly accept whatever "the (((world)))" tells me is correct.
Retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jul 2021 01:52:07 No.13421750 Report

Quoted By:

>>13421743
Perform the calculations yourself and see that you get different results.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches