UnRelatedBurner @ UnRelatedBurner @sh.itjust.works

Posts

19

Comments

693

Joined

2 yr. ago

what if it's a physical interaction that they are talking about?

I once reverted all local changes when trying to learn branches. It's a dangerous game.

Thanks, my A plan is to get thru this hell. I'd only like a summer job. Still, I feel like I should be able to show something up. I started AoC 2023 back in december, day 13 bricked me, and I haven't gotten a 2nd wind yet, and time is running out.

If I can ask for advice.. I heard with leetcode (I'm not doing it, just heard) that if I don't know the solution for something in 30 minutes, I should look it up. Does this apply to AoC? As I remember spending 8 hours on these puzzles and feeling awesome when I finally came up with a solution that worked. But I've gave day 13 two afternoons and I still can't figure it out. I have ideas, but it'll take like a week to code and test all of them, chances are they won't even work. I know that two half days since december isn't very dedicated, but I don't know where tf did these 3 months go, I actually can't remember what happened in jan-feb lol.

I downloaded a pdf to search for the british equivalent. closest thing is further education, "work-based" college, but I'm not at the part-time-work part yet.

School system is so fucked can't even translate it. Best I could get out of online translators is "technical college". But the whole point is, that it's not a college, idk.

Thanks, for the motivation. But I ment it like I don't have time because of school. I have exams due in a week and I have to study 10+ topics in grammar, literature and history. For a week I'm like a zombie.

Wake up at noon, hate life, study bullshit, hate life w/ a numb brain, play some games caz I can't anymore, it's 4am so let's sleep.

I'd like a job for the summer, and I should be working on contacts, or something I can show to my employer, not on literature.

I'm a teen, and I don't even know how to git. I'm learning, tho school does everything in it's power to stop me.

good point lol. I'm a country away from the bags, so I won't check.

This mf never had a grill party.

It resets the bug, but it can still occur in a non-native resolution.

It's still happening, and it's even worse, everything that's not an app just goes black.

You were right! I just now figured thar turning my screen off and back on makes this thing to happen. I still don't have a fix tho..

I made it non-floating, and it fixed the teleporting up issue. And also I found a way to force this bug to happen, it was as simple as turning the screen off & on again. Oh yeah, and it didn't not get fixed with updates.

Alright there buddy, I'd like to close this.

It's clear that your a troll. However, on the offchance that you didn't know, I'll tell you where you went wrong on the first one.

• 2(4)^2=(2x4)^2=8^2=64

You can't distribute into a bracket, that's raised to the power of anything other than 1, like this. To do this you need to raise distributed number to the bracket's power's inverse. in this case 1/2.

• 2(4)^2=(2^(1/2)*4)^2=(sqrt(2)*4)^2=2*4^2=2*16=32
• or y'know 2*16=32

Maybe if we look at it with roots you'd get it. wolfram syntax

• 2(4)^2=2Surd[4,1/2]
• 2Surd[4,1/2]= Surd[4*2^(1/2),1/2]= (4*sqrt(2))^2= 4^2*2= 16*2= 32

I hope you don't get scared from this math, you're a teacher afterall. I have no Idea how you could have gotten a degree or not kicked from school on day 1. Unless.. you are trolling me, fuck you for that. If you respond with more bullshiting, I'll block you.

Idk where you teach, but I'm thankful you didn't teach me.

Let me quizz you, how do you solve 2(2+2)^2? because acording to your linked picture, because brackets are leftmost you do them first. If I were to believe you:

• (2*2+2*2)^2
• (4+4)^2, = 64

but it's just simply incorrect.

• 2(4)^2, wow we're at a 2x^2
• 2*16 = 32

The thing that pisses me off most, is the fact that, yes. Terms exists, yes they have all sorts of properties. But they are not rules, they are properties. And they only apply when we have unknows and we're at the most simplified form. For example your last link, the dude told us that those terms get prio because they are terms!? There are no mention of term prio in the book. It just simply said that when we have a simplified expression like: 2x^2+3x+5 we call 2x^2 and 3x and 5 terms. And yes they get priority, not because we named them those, but because they are multiplications. These help us at functions the most. Where we can assume that the highest power takes the sign at infinity. Maybe if the numbers look right, we can guess where it'd switch sign.

I don't even want to waste energy proofreading this, or telling you the obvious that when we have a div. and a mult. and no x's there really is no point in using terms, as we just get a single number.

But again, I totally understand why someone would use this, it's easier. But it's not the rule still. That's why at some places this is the default. I forgot the name/keywords but if you read a calculator's manual there must be a chapter or something regarding this exact issue.

So yeah, use it. It's good. Especially if you teach physics. But please don't go around making up rules.

As for your sources, you still linked a blog post.

Fuck it, I'm gonna waste time on a troll on the internet who's necroposting in te hopes that they actually wanna argue the learning way.

This example is specifically made to cause confusion.

No, it isn't. It simply tests who has remembered all the rules of Maths and who hasn't.

I said this because of the confusion around the division sign. Almost everyone at some point got it confused, or is just hell bent that one is corrent the other is not. In reality, it is such a common "mistake" that ppl started using it. I'm talking about the classic 4/2x. If x = 2, it is:

1. 4/2*2 = 2*2 = 4
2. 4/(2*2) = 4/4 = 1

Wolfram solved this with going with the second if it is an X or another variable as it's more intuitive.

Division has the same priority as multiplication

And there's no multiplication here - only brackets and division (and addition within the brackets).

Are you sure ur not a troll? how do you calculate 2(1+1)? It's 4. It's called implicit multiplication and we do it all the time. It's the same logic that if a number doesn't have a sign it's positive. We could write this up as +2*(+1+(+1)), but it's harder to read, so we don't.

A fraction could be writen up as (x)/(y) not x/y

Neither of those. A fraction could only be written inline as (x/y) - both of the things you wrote are 2 terms, not one. i.e. brackets needed to make them 1 term.

I don't even fully understand you here. If we have a faction; at the top we have 1+2 and at the bottom we have 6-3. inline we could write this as (1+2)/(6-3). The result is 1 as if we simplify it's 3/3.

You can't say it's ((1+2)/(6-3)). It's the same thing. You will do the orders differently, but I can't think of a situation where it's incorrect, you are just making things harder on yourself.

The fact that some people argue that you do () first and then do what’s outside it means that

...they know all the relevant rules of Maths

You fell into the 2nd trap too. If there is a letter or number or anything next to a bracket, it's multiplication. We just don't write it out, as why would we, to make it less readable? 2x is the same as 2*x and that's the same as 2(x).

look up the facts for yourself

You can find them here

I can't even, you linked social media. The #1 most trust worthy website. Also I can't even read this shit. This guy talks in hashtags. I won't waste energy filtering out all the bullshit to know if they are right or wrong. Don't trust social media. Grab a calculator, look at wolfram docs, ask a professor or teacher. Don't even trust me!

your comment is just as incorrect as everyone who said the answer is 1

and 1 is 100% correct.

I chose a side. But that side it the more RAW solution imo. let's walk it thru:

• 8/2(2+2), let's remove the confusion
• 8/2*(2+2), brackets
• 8/2*(4), mult & div, left -> right
• 4*(4), let go
• 4*4, the only
• 16, answer

BUT, and as I stated above IF it'd be like: 8/2x with x=2+2 then, we kinda decided to put implicit brackets there so it's more like 8/(2x), but it's just harder to read, so we don't.

And here is the controversy, we are playing the same game. Because there wasn't a an explicit multilication, you could argue that it should be handled like the scenario with the x. I disagree, you agree. But even this argument of "like the scenario with the x" is based of what Wolfram decided, there are no rules of this, you do what is more logical in this scenario. It can be a flaw in math, but it never comes up, as you use fractions instead of inline division. And when you are converting to inline, you don't spear the brackets.

well they don’t agree on 0^0

Yes they do - it's 1 (it's the 5th index law). You might be thinking of 0/0, which depends on the context (you need to look at limits).

You said it yourself, if we lim (x->0) y/x then there is an answer. But we aren't in limits. x/0 in undefined at all circumstances (I should add that idk abstract algebra & non-linear geometry, idk what happens there. So I might be incorrect here).

And by all means, correct me if I'm wrong. But link something that isn't an unreadable 3 parted mostodon post like it's some dumb twitter argument. This is some dumb other platform argument. Or don't link anything at all, just show me thru, and we know math rules (now a bit better) so it shouldn't be a problem... as long as we are civilised.

side note: if I did some typos.. it's 2am, sry.

are you drunk?

I like that we stopped evolving after throwing rocks and sticks at animals which coudn't escape caz we just walked after them. It's done, we have no natural predators, and started devolving.

imagine today, where if you couldn't sit for 8-9 hours or blank out (school) for 8-9 hours or sleep as little as possible or have your arm in an uncomfortable position for 8-9 hours, you'd just starve, like it ye' olden days. How much would we change?

You were edging for 40 years?

What surgery was it if I may ask?

I could see why tho. What happens today is not the same as this ideal probably. You could argue that if your a fit, 20s, healthy, etc. and you just sit home all day, your kinda a waste, but then again siting somewhere else 9-5 is also a waste so.

Eh, I can see why would someone think that. There are things that I disagree with more.