Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 159

Thread: Detroit files bankruptsy!

  1. #106
    God Almighty.
    Signatures are for losers.

 

  • #107
    guyjin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Province
    The land between two rivers
    Oratio
    7,562

    Ignore User

    Re: Detroit files bankruptsy!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    ei(pi)+1=0


    Two transcendental numbers, an imaginary one, and one make nothing at all.
    I can't quite wrap my brain around how we can not know the exact values of pi and e, but also know this.

  • #108
    Quote Originally Posted by guyjin View Post
    I can't quite wrap my brain around how we can not know the exact values of pi and e, but also know this.
    Well we do know their exact values. We just can't write them down on a finite amount of paper.
    Signatures are for losers.

  • #109
    Friendly Coffee Kzach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Province
    Melbourne
    Oratio
    9,732

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Thyme View Post
    God Almighty.
    I doubt even he could help us now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger Wickett View Post
    I'm mostly with Spoony.

  • #110
    Quote Originally Posted by Kzach View Post
    I doubt even he could help us now.
    Watching this argument is like watching an argument about whether a falling tree makes a sound if there's no one around to hear. It's obviously just a matter of which of two valid definitions of a word you're using, and the fact that some people don't get that is spooky.
    Signatures are for losers.

  • #111
    Haulin ass shiningbrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Province
    Funkytown
    Oratio
    4,977

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fallacies. They are fallacies. Good grief.

    Rounding introduces error. You explanation even states the error. That it is acceptable error to the point of standard practice doesn't change the fact that by rounding, you are changing the correct answer to a less correct one.
    It seems you simply wish to play with semantics. That's fine. Language is a social contract. Meaning is shared. We are geared into the world as verbal beings. It's clear that you wish to apply the notion of error in a very specific way. Rounding is error to you. I see rounding as an intentional operation. Error to me suggests lack of intention and mistakes. I made no mistakes by rounding up. I did it intentionally for practical reasons. Therein lies the difference.

    I don't disagree with you if you wish to cede that there can be distinctions between how a word is used and/or defined, but to crown yourself king of language is a bit of an overreach, doncha think?
    Last edited by shiningbrow; July 26th, 2013 at 06:04 PM.
    "When the subway jerks, it's the fixed stars that throw you down."

  • #112
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,409

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    No, we don't. Rounding introduces error, even if you make dresses.
    We round measurements to the nearest inch on our "dresses", and nobody complains, because it's not an error. It's how normally socially adjusted human beings operate with many functional numbers which have direct utility in their lives.

    I bet you're impressive in the kitchen - if the receipt says a cup, it's gonna be exactly one fucking cup for you down to the millimeter, right? Oh...but that would be rounding too and therefore an "error", wouldn't it. How do you cope?
    Last edited by Mistwell; July 26th, 2013 at 06:10 PM.
    I like hats.

  • #113
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,409

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Thyme View Post
    Watching this argument is like watching an argument about whether a falling tree makes a sound if there's no one around to hear. It's obviously just a matter of which of two valid definitions of a word you're using, and the fact that some people don't get that is spooky.

    I totally get it. You're absolutely correct. And yet, seeing Ovi and Turjan froth in their pedantic desire for an orderly world is well worth continuing it. I always know when I've gotten to Ovi, for example, when he starts calling me a dress maker. It's the sort of thing that makes my day, and I'd hug him for it if I could
    I like hats.

  • #114
    Cockface! Turjan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Vienna
    Oratio
    5,860

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    You explanation even states the error.
    That's the fun part of it.

  • #115
    Redwick, re-imagined RedWick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Province
    Michigan
    Oratio
    4,954

    Ignore User
    Quick! Somebody rename this thread to: When Engineers Argue With Lawyers
    Life... is like a grapefruit. It's orange and squishy, and has a few pips in it, and some folks have half a one for breakfast. - Douglas Adams

  • #116
    diaglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Stoned Mtn, GA
    Oratio
    36,522

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by RedWick View Post
    Quick! Somebody rename this thread to: When Engineers Argue With Lawyers
    fucking artistes

    you need to be more creative.


    Rock City: civil engineering unrest gets (peggy) sued
    FWIW, I'm on the design team and I pretty much find WoW as fun and interesting as banging my head against a brick wall.-- Mike Mearls

    I mean, I never GET any but that would be preferable. --Rel

  • #117
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,180

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by guyjin View Post
    I can't quite wrap my brain around how we can not know the exact values of pi and e, but also know this.
    Well, we know the exact value of 1/3, but we can't represent it in decimal format. It's like that.

    e is the value for which the value of ex is exactly equal to it's derivative -- in laymans terms the value matches exactly the value of it's rate of change (as you vary x). That's not the hard one, though.

    i is the imaginary number. We ran out of real numbers to decribe what happens when you take the square root of negative 1 (-1), so we made one up. i is equal to the square root of negative one, and it's useful shorthand to take square roots of negative numbers. For instance, the sq(-4) = 2i = sq(4)*sq(-1). If you think this is silly, all modern electroncs and power pretty much rely on the imaginary number to work (AC power, frex, especially multi-phase AC).

    And we all know pi as the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter.

    The above formula, though, takes advantage of Euler's identity, which is a slick piece of math if ever there was one. It translates sin and cos into e to the power of equations. It can get rather complex sometimes. However, this isn't one of them. You could rewrite the equation, using the identity, as sin(-pi)+1=0. In radians, -pi is the same as pi, which is equal to 180 degrees, and the sin of that is equal to -1. It's just a simple place to solve the Euler identity that happens to use all the really fun numbers and makes a neat equation.

    Quote Originally Posted by shiningbrow View Post
    It seems you simply wish to play with semantics. That's fine. Language is a social contract. Meaning is shared. We are geared into the world as verbal beings. It's clear that you wish to apply the notion of error in a very specific way. Rounding is error to you. I see rounding as an intentional operation. Error to me suggests lack of intention and mistakes. I made no mistakes by rounding up. I did it intentionally for practical reasons. Therein lies the difference.
    No, it's not sematics. If you round, your answer is different from the correct value. It is in error. If you'd pay attention, you realize that I've also said that this error may be irrelevant to you, and acceptable. But it is, nevertheless, error.

    I don't disagree with you if you wish to cede that there can be distinctions between how a word is used and/or defined, but to crown yourself king of language is a bit of an overreach, doncha think?
    It's funny that you're trying to find a middle ground to compromise on when you're completely wrong. And you don't even know that it's fallacies, not fallabilities, which are, again, very different things even in common language usage. Please stop arguing things you don't understand.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mistwell View Post
    We round measurements to the nearest inch on our "dresses", and nobody complains, because it's not an error. It's how normally socially adjusted human beings operate with many functional numbers which have direct utility in their lives.
    Of course you do. It's called 'acceptable error'. I bet you don't round to the nearest 10s of inches, though, because that would be 'unacceptable error'. But they're both rounding. If we go with your explanation, neither is an error, which is clearly wrong.

    You're attempting to make an argument of scale and acceptability into an argument of correctness. Rounding introduces error. The answer after rounding in incorrect. It may, however, still be very, very useful.
    I bet you're impressive in the kitchen - if the receipt says a cup, it's gonna be exactly one fucking cup for you down to the millimeter, right? Oh...but that would be rounding too and therefore an "error", wouldn't it. How do you cope?
    If we're talking about receipts, I'm not sure what cooking you're doing. I call that takeout.

    I would recognize that I do not have exactly a cup, that my measurement is likely in error, and I would continue on, because so long as I make the attempt to get close, the error is acceptable.

    It is, however, still error.

  • #118
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,180

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by RedWick View Post
    Quick! Somebody rename this thread to: When Engineers Argue With Lawyers
    I don't know why you want to insult Turjan. He didn't do anything to you, and here you're calling him a dirty word.

  • #119
    Redwick, re-imagined RedWick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Province
    Michigan
    Oratio
    4,954

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    I don't know why you want to insult Turjan. He didn't do anything to you, and here you're calling him a dirty word.
    Hey now, some of my best friends are engineers.
    Life... is like a grapefruit. It's orange and squishy, and has a few pips in it, and some folks have half a one for breakfast. - Douglas Adams

  • #120
    Cockface! Turjan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Vienna
    Oratio
    5,860

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    It's funny that you're trying to find a middle ground to compromise on when you're completely wrong. Please stop arguing things you don't understand.
    Which is the crux of it. If you don't have any understanding of a subject, you don't have the ability to recognize that you are wrong. Rounding is a mathematical operation. With lack of even some basic understanding of math, answers will necessarily become sketchy. Refusal to apply basic logic finally renders the task hopeless.

    I guess this is a typical case of "all opinions are equal". But yes, in the end, everybody has the right to be wrong.

  • Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •