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
763 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:19:12 AM
588 Views
Number theory holds a concept called "cyclic numbers."
- 25/05/2010 06:04:43 AM
671 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
663 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:19:12 AM
588 Views
Happy Birthday...?
- 25/05/2010 08:56:59 AM
527 Views
- 25/05/2010 08:56:59 AM
527 Views
You're a day early
- 25/05/2010 09:10:30 AM
548 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:10:30 AM
548 Views
Got me on a technicality.
- 25/05/2010 09:19:54 AM
472 Views
Re: Got me on a technicality.
- 25/05/2010 09:27:59 AM
482 Views
But we're AWESOME!
- 25/05/2010 09:47:30 AM
600 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:50:43 AM
469 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:50:43 AM
469 Views
Number THEORY is great fun, but too many folks make math too tedious, I'm afraid.
- 25/05/2010 09:53:21 AM
497 Views
- 25/05/2010 09:53:21 AM
497 Views
You tend to get cyclic repeats when dividing by primes
- 25/05/2010 11:58:34 AM
698 Views
I actually DO feel like taking a course on number theory.
- 25/05/2010 12:12:10 PM
633 Views
Re: I actually DO feel like taking a course on number theory.
- 25/05/2010 01:46:10 PM
488 Views
Well, I'm not vouching for Wikipedias claim, just reiterating it.
- 25/05/2010 02:35:23 PM
698 Views
It's usually right but I wouldn't but much value on the implied importance
- 25/05/2010 04:22:52 PM
555 Views
If you say so; I really try hard not to channel Pythagoras.
- 26/05/2010 09:26:22 AM
735 Views
- 26/05/2010 09:26:22 AM
735 Views
Re: If you say so; I really try hard not to channel Pythagoras.
- 26/05/2010 10:00:37 AM
690 Views
- 26/05/2010 10:00:37 AM
690 Views
