[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting





Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:

On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:

Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that if a
thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be paying me
to use their hardware.  Isn't it similar to the problem in saying that
something costs, say, three times less than <time ago>?  Isn't
/one/ time less than what was paid equal to zero?  Wouldn't we be more
correct in saying one third the price?

Cybe R. Wizard -wants to understand, not just pedantic

Following these statements and math, one is always dividing, not
subtracting.  No matter how many times you divide you are still left with
parts.  If you then call each of the new parts a whole and divide it you
never end up with 0 or less then 0.  Unless you divide by 0, but of course
that is an imaginary number (i).


i=sqrt(-1). If 4 feet from bar. Divide by 2 = 2 feet from bar. ...
never reach bar :-(.


indeed, imaginary numbers are not arrived at by dividing by zero. To divide by zero is to not divide at all. Imaginary numbers are orthogonal to the Real number line. However, the poster above could be correct that someone should be paying him if a price drops by 2000-fold. We are not dealing with Zeno's paradox because of the order of operations and that "fold" can mean multiply or divide. The final operation is is to "drop" or subtraction. So it is not recursive and is either by one two-thousandth or 200,000 percent.

sorry, I haven't been paying attention until now and I am no theoretical nor practical mathematician by any stretch. But felt like throwing in my two cents anyway

--
~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`
Michael Z Daryabeygi
Database Applications Developer
Sligo Computer Services Co-op
www.sligowebworks.com
301.270.9673 x 304
~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`~,~`


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 7/9/2005



Reply to: