You are not logged in.
login | register

Discussion: Roundtable
Topic: exponents


Post a new topic to the Roundtable Discussion discussion
<< see all messages in this topic
<previous message | next message >


Subject:   RE: exponents
Author: Alan Cooper
Date: Oct 18 2004
On Oct 18 2004, Mathman wrote:
> I'm not trying to be argumentative or picky . . .
> . . .from observing empirically 10^5/10^2 = =10^(5-2) = 10^3
> and so on] it *follows* that 10^3/10^5 = 10^(-2).  

I don't think so.
In fact, with the repeated multiplication definition, 10^(-2) does not even
exist! It only makes sense if we *define* it somehow (and of course as 1/(10^2)
is probably the only useful choice).

My concern is that, by saying "it *follows* that", we may cause some students to
lose faith in their own (correct) understunding of logical implication.

I think we can agree that *I* am the one being "picky", and so I will try to
avoid posting more on this, but will reply privately if you want to chat
further.
cheers,
   Alan

Reply to this message          Quote this message when replying?
yes  no
Post a new topic to the Roundtable Discussion discussion

Discussion Help