Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology � 261
Replies: 11   Last Post: May 16, 2013 8:42 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Scott Berg Posts: 2,111 Registered: 12/12/04
Re: Matheology � 261
Posted: May 16, 2013 8:42 PM

"fom" <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote in message
news:XuWdnenVQ7aIiQnMnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 5/15/2013 5:40 PM, AMiews wrote:
>> "WM" <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote in message

>>> On 12 Mai, 23:03, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>>>

>>>>>> The process by which you get any line is not independent of the prior
>>>>>> lines having at one time been in existence, so all those prior lines
>>>>>> once existed

>>>>
>>>>> But there is no difference for a line whether or not the preceding
>>>>> lines continue to exist.

>>>>
>>>> Once it has come into existence, its continued existence may not be
>>>> needed, but if it never had existed, neither could its successors.
>>>>
>>>> In a sane world the existence of 2 requires a prior existence of 1, and
>>>> existence of any natural n + 1 requires a prior existence of n.

>>>
>>> So 3 + 4 is 16 because the predecessors of 3 and 4 claim their right?
>>>
>>> Regards, WM

>>
>> wrong,
>> 3 + 4 = 10 base 7
>> or 3 + 4 = 11 base 6
>> or 3 + 4 = 12 base 5
>>
>> So why you say 16 ?
>>
>>

>
> 1+2+3=6
> 1+2+3+4=10
> 10+6=16
>
> "predecessors of 3 and 4 claim their right"
>
>

"predecessors of n and k claim their right" =
= Sum(0 to n) + Sum(0 to k) =
= n*(n+1)/2+k*(k+1)/2 =

= (1/4 )* n*k*(n+1)*(k+1)

so what happened to these so called predcessors?
and why is there only 1/4 of them ?
and why are there preceeders ??

Date Subject Author
5/11/13 Virgil
5/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/12/13 Virgil
5/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/12/13 Virgil
5/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/14/13 Virgil
5/15/13 Scott Berg
5/15/13 fom
5/16/13 Scott Berg