Xander ,'Selfless'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Sometimes I would try to reverse engineer so there would appear to be work shown.
Which I think is why I did as well as I did on the math portion of the SATs. I mean, it's multiple choice, one of them's right, it's just a matter of plugging the number in and balancing the ends until they match.
I know you're supposed to work out equations and stuff for these sorts of things, but I always play with the patterns of things until the right answer, well, kind of pops up or I give up.
That's a perfectly fine way of doing math! That's what math is about! The equations and formulas are just ways of generalizing those patterns!
Seriously, I'd say that just about the only way to really learn math is to play with the patterns and stuff. Just about all of my research starts with playing around and trying to see if there's a pattern or a sort of logic to the way something works (most of my notes from early on working on something tend to be kind of blobby diagrams), and then, once I've figured it out that way, go back and work on the details of the equations.
The way John Holt explained it in one of his books (I've been kind of binging on Holt lately) is some students will look for the answer IN the problem. They see the problem as a description of a situation, with one piece of it missing, and they have to figure out what piece fits into that hole. Those students generally have a pretty good understanding of what they're doing. Other students see the problem as a bunch of numbers, and they've got to plug the numbers into some equations or formulas, and then that'll give them the answer. The answer isn't in the problem; the question is in the problem, and then all the "math" is a sort of bridge over to Answerland, where the answer lives. And if they're pretty good at remembering stuff, they'll get the right answer a lot of the time, but they won't understand the connections between things -- each problem is on its own little island, and they know how to get from there to the answer, but they don't understand how the equations work other than as a bridge to Answerland.
That's a perfectly fine way of doing math! That's what math is about! The equations and formulas are just ways of generalizing those patterns!
Dammit, why weren't you teaching math in Southwestern Pa 35 years ago! If I'd known my mind really was working on a mathy track, I'd be an engineer today.
the question wasn't 'what is the answer' but 'why is the answer the right answer'. To be very honest - the right answer is a start, however, the why part is often more important in both the theoretical areas of math, and in the practical real world areas of a job. So I understand why he doesn't get all the points.
happy birthday young Christopher!
More ma ~~~ sending out to all in need.
and extra karma points to Aimee.
xyz = 8
5(xy) + 15(xy) + 10(yz)
25xy + 10yz
25(8/z) + 10(8/x)
200/z + 80/x
Okay, I'm clearly doing this problem wrong.
Oh shit! There are four sides!
5(xy) + 15(xy) + 4 x 10(yz)
25xy + 40yz
25(8/z) + 40(8/x)
200/z + 320/x
320/x + 200/z
Okay, I'm still clearly doing this problem wrong.
Well, fuck, there's the part where I CAN'T ADD.
20xy + 40yz
20(8/z) + 40(8/x)
160/z + 320/x
320/x + 160/z
Well, shit, this has them all costing the same. I suck.
P-C, you missed the part that said that the base is a square.
Well, shit, this has them all costing the same. I suck.
Just remember, PC, the world hasn't lost a biological researcher, it's gained one less way for someone to say "whoops, forget that conclusion I announced to the world press yesterday, I did the math wrong."
P-C, you missed the part that said that the base is a square.
I'm confused, then. Then there are only two possibilities, right? That the base is is either 2 x 2 or 1 x 1? And the base is automatically the top and bottom? So all you do is try out both possibilities?
20(2)(2) + 40(2)(2) = 240
20(1)(1) + 40(1)(8) = 340
I won!
(I saw the square thing before, but I didn't think THAT'S what it meant, because it made the problem way too easy.)
P-C, you missed the part that said that the base is a square.
And the part that said the box has to be big enough to contain three spherical cows.
Anyway, I agree that the question really is, "find the dimensions that results in the minimal cost, using differential calculus to show why your answer results in the minimum." Even if the question doesn't say that exactly, it's implied by virtue of being on the test at this time.
Then there are only two possibilities, right? That the base is is either 2 x 2 or 1 x 1? And the base is automatically the top and bottom? So all you do is try out both possibilities?
Who said that the sides had to be integers? 4 x 4 x 1/2 or 3 x 3 x 8/9 or any of an infinite number of others would get a volume of 8 cubic feet, too.