I actually DO feel like taking a course on number theory.
Joel Send a noteboard - 25/05/2010 12:12:10 PM
In fact, my HS Honors Algebra teacher suggested it. He also baptized me, but that was about ten years later.
Unfortunately I'm a bit put off by the notation and nomenclature, and, though I could be mistaken, it requires at least a little of the calc knowledge I lack. And yet calc strikes me as some of the most interesting math because it's not just manipulating numbers, there's actual THOUGHT involved.
Speaking of which, I get all you were saying here; I KNOW it's not a mystical magical miracle--but that tells me what it ISN'T, not what it is. Like I said, 2 isn't "spooky" because adding it to itself, or multiplying it, or even raising it to its own power give the same result, it's just that all those things are, in this particular case, the same operation: You're putting two things with two other things, and that means there's four of them, because that's just how counting works. My problem here is I'm UNABLE to explain 7 that way, and it bothers me. And the more I look at it, the freakier it gets, like with the (22/7)^2~10 thing. I mean, seriously, "if leading zeros are not permitted on numerals, then 142857 is the only cyclic number in decimal"?!!! What kind of twisted crap is that?
Unfortunately I'm a bit put off by the notation and nomenclature, and, though I could be mistaken, it requires at least a little of the calc knowledge I lack. And yet calc strikes me as some of the most interesting math because it's not just manipulating numbers, there's actual THOUGHT involved.Speaking of which, I get all you were saying here; I KNOW it's not a mystical magical miracle--but that tells me what it ISN'T, not what it is. Like I said, 2 isn't "spooky" because adding it to itself, or multiplying it, or even raising it to its own power give the same result, it's just that all those things are, in this particular case, the same operation: You're putting two things with two other things, and that means there's four of them, because that's just how counting works. My problem here is I'm UNABLE to explain 7 that way, and it bothers me. And the more I look at it, the freakier it gets, like with the (22/7)^2~10 thing. I mean, seriously, "if leading zeros are not permitted on numerals, then 142857 is the only cyclic number in decimal"?!!! What kind of twisted crap is that?
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Continuing the Math Theme, WTF Is Up with the Seven?
- 25/05/2010 02:12:09 AM
705 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:19:12 AM
528 Views
Number theory holds a concept called "cyclic numbers."
- 25/05/2010 06:04:43 AM
603 Views
"If leading zeros are not permitted on numerals, then 142857 is the only cyclic number in decimal. "
- 25/05/2010 06:27:36 AM
604 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:19:12 AM
528 Views
Happy Birthday...?
- 25/05/2010 08:56:59 AM
467 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:56:59 AM
467 Views
You're a day early
- 25/05/2010 09:10:30 AM
485 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:10:30 AM
485 Views
Got me on a technicality.
- 25/05/2010 09:19:54 AM
396 Views
Re: Got me on a technicality.
- 25/05/2010 09:27:59 AM
423 Views
But we're AWESOME!
- 25/05/2010 09:47:30 AM
529 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:50:43 AM
413 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:50:43 AM
413 Views
Number THEORY is great fun, but too many folks make math too tedious, I'm afraid.
- 25/05/2010 09:53:21 AM
438 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:53:21 AM
438 Views
You tend to get cyclic repeats when dividing by primes
- 25/05/2010 11:58:34 AM
641 Views
I actually DO feel like taking a course on number theory.
- 25/05/2010 12:12:10 PM
574 Views
Re: I actually DO feel like taking a course on number theory.
- 25/05/2010 01:46:10 PM
428 Views
Well, I'm not vouching for Wikipedias claim, just reiterating it.
- 25/05/2010 02:35:23 PM
641 Views
It's usually right but I wouldn't but much value on the implied importance
- 25/05/2010 04:22:52 PM
495 Views
If you say so; I really try hard not to channel Pythagoras.
- 26/05/2010 09:26:22 AM
670 Views
- 26/05/2010 09:26:22 AM
670 Views
Re: If you say so; I really try hard not to channel Pythagoras.
- 26/05/2010 10:00:37 AM
621 Views
- 26/05/2010 10:00:37 AM
621 Views
