|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 12, 2010 16:04:01 GMT
Bullshit. That last digit should be an 8 because the next digit is a 9 so you round up. |
|
|
|
Post by MeAmCryzor on Oct 12, 2010 17:23:11 GMT
Bullshit. That last digit should be an 8 because the next digit is a 9 so you round up. But since he's put an ellipsis, so you shouldn't round up since it implies the number keeps going. If he put an 8, that would imply it went 3.14159265358989... rather than 3.14159265358979...  Edit: I forgot how to spell ellipsis for some reason  |
|
|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 12, 2010 18:28:33 GMT
But since he's put an elypsis, so you shouldn't round up since it implies the number keeps going. If he put an 8, that would imply it went 3.14159265358989... rather than 3.14159265358979... Elipses are for recurring decimals. Not irrationals. They imply the number keeps going along the same pattern. |
|
|
|
Post by MeAmCryzor on Oct 12, 2010 18:34:38 GMT
But since he's put an ellipsis, so you shouldn't round up since it implies the number keeps going. If he put an 8, that would imply it went 3.14159265358989... rather than 3.14159265358979... Elipses are for recurring decimals. Not irrationals. They imply the number keeps going along the same pattern. No they don't, thats the vinculum bar. An ellipsis merely implies that the decimal continues. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 12, 2010 18:49:04 GMT
They don't mean it, they imply it. Not everyone has such a mastery of special characters as... people with a mastery of special characters, and it's perfectly reasonable (and generally assumed) that you're removing a frankly useless notation (which only leads to more inaccurate approximations) in favour of something mildly useful. For example, the combination ~= is used to mean ≈ for people who don't know how to produce the latter, or =/= in place of ≠.
The fact we... for want of a better word... approximate like this and some people don't accept that leads to disagreements such as this one where all that's achieved is a bit of power is wasted.
... And that's how people who don't know the ALT number codes for special ASCII characters cause global warming.
Then again, I'm firmly of the opinion that "p'rhaps" is the greatest thing in the English language.
|
|
|
|
Post by MeAmCryzor on Oct 12, 2010 19:00:14 GMT
They don't mean it, they imply it. Not everyone has such a mastery of special characters as... people with a mastery of special characters, and it's perfectly reasonable (and generally assumed) that you're removing a frankly useless notation (which only leads to more inaccurate approximations) in favour of something mildly useful. For example, the combination ~= is used to mean ≈ for people who don't know how to produce the latter, or =/= in place of ≠. The fact we... for want of a better word... approximate like this and some people don't accept that leads to disagreements such as this one where all that's achieved is a bit of power is wasted. ... And that's how people who don't know the ALT number codes for special ASCII characters cause global warming. Then again, I'm firmly of the opinion that "p'rhaps" is the greatest thing in the English language. I suppose your right that theres no point in arguing  But all I was saying that I think he meant the ellipsis as 'and so on' so to round up would be incorrect  |
|
|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 12, 2010 19:03:33 GMT
I suppose your right that theres no point in arguing Man, I was only saying that to set up the global warming joke. LET'S KEEP ARGUING. |
|
|
|
Post by MeAmCryzor on Oct 12, 2010 19:06:26 GMT
I suppose your right that theres no point in arguing Man, I was only saying that to set up the global warming joke. LET'S KEEP ARGUING. Nevar! Well, at least not in the birthday thread anyways. And I dislike arguing anyway |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2010 1:13:28 GMT
I lost track of everything after when MeAmCryzor said "ellipsis".
|
|
njayhuang
Staff Member 
Cyber Ninja
Without Asuka from Germany, everybody would be lost
Posts: 3,472
|
Post by njayhuang on Oct 13, 2010 9:34:16 GMT
I suppose your right that theres no point in arguing Man, I was only saying that to set up the global warming joke. LET'S KEEP ARGUING. This is why I love you. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 13, 2010 10:43:13 GMT
This is hardly maths discussion. It should be called "The Pointless Semantics" thread.
|
|
Admin
GFF Overseer 
シリウス
Posts: 4,904 
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2010 15:20:14 GMT
^ Meh, numbers (which equals math IMO) are all the same anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mad'n'Harry on Oct 13, 2010 16:45:47 GMT
^ Meh, numbers ( which equals math IMO) are all the same anyway. To people who don't use math daily. I'm at an engineering school and I definitely think there's a difference. Math here seems to be getting more and more symbols-based instead of using numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by Hydra450 on Oct 20, 2010 0:04:37 GMT
I learned that to get the decimal equvilent of any given fraction, you must divide the numerator by the denominator
|
|
|
|
Post by Mad'n'Harry on Oct 20, 2010 0:13:09 GMT
I learned that to get the decimal equvilent of any given fraction, you must divide the numerator by the denominator Wait. What grade are you in? Oh, right. Only we Americans learn this in Elementary school because of our stupid measurement system. Why couldn't we just use metric? |
|
|
|
Post by Dogmantra on Oct 20, 2010 7:01:13 GMT
I learned that to get the decimal equvilent of any given fraction, you must divide the numerator by the denominator Wait. What grade are you in? Oh, right. Only we Americans learn this in Elementary school because of our stupid measurement system. Why couldn't we just use metric? The bizarre thing here is that we learn very early in England that to convert a fraction to decimal, you divide the numerator by the denominator. It's not until, I believe, GCSE level (when you're 15/16) that you learn how to go the other way. Until then you have to just know common decimals and their fractions. |
|
|
|
Post by Mad'n'Harry on Oct 20, 2010 21:43:11 GMT
The bizarre thing here is that we learn very early in England that to convert a fraction to decimal, you divide the numerator by the denominator. It's not until, I believe, GCSE level (when you're 15/16) that you learn how to go the other way. Until then you have to just know common decimals and their fractions. Really? It seems strange that there would be such a large gap in there... but it is quite difficult to go from, say, .93333.... to a fraction. |
|
