wu :: forums
« wu :: forums - changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons. »

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Apr 18th, 2024, 2:34pm

RIDDLES SITE WRITE MATH! Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members Login Login Register Register
   wu :: forums
   riddles
   medium
(Moderators: Grimbal, towr, ThudnBlunder, SMQ, william wu, Icarus, Eigenray)
   changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons.
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons.  (Read 1586 times)
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons.  
« on: May 24th, 2014, 7:21am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

1. numerical value is comprised of set of one equal to that value
2. All numerical values should be written in a sequence using a comma to separate all numbers.
3. the addition of two numerical values is the listing of both sets of ones join by a comma.  
4. The solution to an addition problem is the count of commas.
E.g.
5 = {1,1,1,1,1}
6 ={1,1,1,1,1,1}
5+6 = {1,1,1,1,1 , 1,1,1,1,1,1} = 10 (because there are 10 commas)
 
5. All other mathematical operations are linked to addition in the manner as it was before.  
 
Solve:
 
1+0=
8 - 5 =
3 × 5 =
1 2 / 4 =
Sqrt (36)
3+5×2=
3x-6 = 21, x =
Derivative of 3x
Anti derivative of  3x
« Last Edit: May 24th, 2014, 8:50am by BMAD » IP Logged
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to  and its consequ  
« Reply #1 on: May 24th, 2014, 7:28am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

When i say linked to addition I mean
Multiplication can be considered repeated addition.
Subtraction can be written as an equivalent addition statement
Division is repeated subtraction
And so on
« Last Edit: May 24th, 2014, 8:50am by BMAD » IP Logged
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #2 on: May 25th, 2014, 8:07am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

1 + 0 = {1} = 0 (no commas)
IP Logged
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Some people are average, some are just mean.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 13730
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #3 on: May 25th, 2014, 10:59am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

8 - 5 = 4
IP Logged

Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
*****





   


Posts: 735
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #4 on: May 25th, 2014, 4:56pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

So, basically, each time you add, you subtract 1 from the normal total?
 
In that case, multiplication isn't commutative. 5 + 5 + 5 = 13 is different from 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 11.
 
So we need to know which of those 3 x 5 means.
IP Logged
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #5 on: May 25th, 2014, 10:53pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on May 25th, 2014, 4:56pm, dudiobugtron wrote:
So, basically, each time you add, you subtract 1 from the normal total?
 
In that case, multiplication isn't commutative. 5 + 5 + 5 = 13 is different from 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 11.
 
So we need to know which of those 3 x 5 means.

 
Not quite:
 
5x3 would be either
 
5 ={1,1,1,1,1}
3= {1,1,1}
 
So 5 x 3 = 5 + 5 +5 or = 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3
 
5 case= {1,1,1,1,1 , 1,1,1,1,1 , 1,1,1,1,1} = 14
3 case={1,1,1 , 1,1,1 , 1,1,1 , 1,1,1 , 1,1,1} = 14
 
So remember it is the count of commas.
IP Logged
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Some people are average, some are just mean.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 13730
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #6 on: May 25th, 2014, 11:20pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The trouble is that means there's a difference between 5 + 5 +5 and (5 + 5) + 5. So how does that affect other sums with multiple operations?
Do we have  
3 + 5 × 2 = 3 + (5 × 2) = 3 + 9 = 11
or
3 + 5 × 2 = 3 + 5 + 5 = 12
?
IP Logged

Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #7 on: May 25th, 2014, 11:25pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

To me in this set of rules. ..  The order of operations do not get resolved step wise but in one swoop, the order just gives structure to which ones get combined first. Which shouldn't change the answers.
IP Logged
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
*****





   


Posts: 735
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #8 on: May 26th, 2014, 12:04am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

12 / 4 :
9 + 4 = 12 so 12 - 4 = 9
5 + 4 + 4 = 12 so 12 - 4 - 4 = 5
similarly 12 - 4 - 4 - 4 = 1
 
So I guess that means 12 / 4 = 3 remainder 1.
 
PS: re order of operations:
What towr meant (I imagine) wasn't specifically about brackets and how to interpret them.  It's that if you do 5 + 5 first, then take that answer and add 5 again, the answer you get is different from 5 + 5 + 5.
« Last Edit: May 26th, 2014, 12:10am by dudiobugtron » IP Logged
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
*****





134688278 134688278   rmsgrey   rmsgrey


Gender: male
Posts: 2872
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #9 on: May 26th, 2014, 7:30am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

So 2={1,1}
1={1}
1+1={1 , 1}=1
 
So {1} = {1 , 1} =/= {1,1}
 
Huh
IP Logged
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #10 on: May 26th, 2014, 7:34am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

In this world, 1 is the additive identity.  
So 8 + 1 = 8, 1 + 1 =1 and so on.
IP Logged
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
*****





   


Posts: 735
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #11 on: May 26th, 2014, 3:12pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

sqrt(36) isn't defined.  There is no number x where you can add it to itself x times to get 36.
6+6+6+6+6+6 = 35
7+7+7+7+7+7+7 = 48
so sqrt(35) = 6, but sqrt(36) isn't defined.
 
Unless you have a way of representing 'un-natural' numbers, you can't sqrt 36.
 
on May 26th, 2014, 7:30am, rmsgrey wrote:
So 2={1,1}
1={1}
1+1={1 , 1}=1
 
So {1} = {1 , 1} =/= {1,1}
 
Huh

 
1 + 1 doesn't actually equal {1 , 1}; you just have to create the construction {1 , 1} in order to work it out.
« Last Edit: May 26th, 2014, 3:15pm by dudiobugtron » IP Logged
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Some people are average, some are just mean.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 13730
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #12 on: May 26th, 2014, 10:08pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Maybe sqrt(36) = 5
 
{1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1} -[ sqrt ] -> {1,1,1,1,1,1} -[=]-> 5
« Last Edit: May 26th, 2014, 10:09pm by towr » IP Logged

Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #13 on: May 27th, 2014, 5:09am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Interestingly I had the same answer for sqrt (36) as tower originally considering it only a geometric interpretation.   I failed to consider it a arithmetic interpretation like dudiobugtron.  So I think they may be right in labeling this as undefinable given its two possible solutions (and even others may still exist).
IP Logged
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
*****





   


Posts: 735
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #14 on: May 27th, 2014, 6:48pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

In that case, I'm not entirely sure how to solve:
3x-6 = 21
 
I was going to solve it by rearranging:
3x = 21 + 6
3x = 26
x = 26 / 3
x = 9 (because 9 + 9 + 9 = 26 )
 
Is that what you had in mind?
 
-------------------------------------------
Also I think the derivative question is interesting.  Of course, since there are no in-between numbers, the graph of y = 3x is not anywhere continuous, and so can't really be differentiated.
 
But assuming we're allowed to 'connect the dots' for the purposes of differentiating, then:
 
The graph of y = 36 looks exactly like the normal graph of y = 3x - 1.
So, in that case, you'd think the gradient would be 3; since the slope is the same.  However, it depends on how you define the gradient.  If it is something like 'rise over run', then the formula might be:
 
(y2 - y1) / (x2 - x1)
 
when x = 2, y = 5
when x = 3, y = 8
 
So the gradient from 2 to 3 is:
( 8 - 5 ) / ( 3 - 2)
= 4 / 2
= 2 remainder 1. (since 2 + 2 = 3, but 2 + 2 + 1 = 4)
 
Let's pick a different point:
 
when x = 1, y = 2
Then, the gradient from 1 to 3 is:
(8 - 2) / (3 - 1)
= 7 / 3
= 2 remainder 2.
 
So it looks like defining the gradient that way doesn't always give the same answer.  Anyone have any ideas on how to do it consistently?
IP Logged
BMAD
Junior Member
**





   


Posts: 57
Re: changing the fundamentals to Math and its cons  
« Reply #15 on: May 27th, 2014, 7:00pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Yes.
IP Logged
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board