Today my friend mentioned to me something about a way, a universal was to solve many, or all, math problems, or anything with mathmatical logic. I’ve heard that this method is “banned” from being used in schools because, from what I’ve heard, has very little math involved in it. If anybody has any idea of where i could find this or know anything about it I would realy want to hear it. I’m having trouble finding it because im not quite sure what to look for. So if any of you know anything at all about it please post.
don’t we all . . . . if you can tell the lottery numbers for the next week let me know - I’ll get you a math text book.
Lol dude, if their were such thing, I guarantee you that you’d be taught it at school, or it’d be on YouTube.
I found it in CVS. it’s code name is ti-89. and yes, my daughter was banned from using it in school. she actaully was. the teacher confiscated it and I had to go in to get it back and promise to get her a dumber one.
Its probably a specific form of mental math. I myself have invented my own way of mental math since I was in first grade, and can do math very quickly. My parents and sisters are even faster. Do they teach it school? No. The reason is because everyone thinks differently and have their own way. I’ve only had one math teacher that THOUGHT like me. Anyway, this “algorithm” is probably just a way that many super quick people think out their math. For many people though, it is slower than other ways.
Hopefully that made sense.
EDIT: Ah yes, the TI-89. You can solve anything with the tap of a few buttons.
Well thats “great” help, of course, i should have known that it probably wasnt per say real. One that friend tells those stories, ya’ know, where its so unbelievable all you can do is just nod your head and agree. And two, my alg 2 teach didnt say anything about, or she just wasnt paying attention. Still, it was worth a try asking, if anybody knew, it would have been you guys:D because you’re all so smart.(btw, thats not sarcasm, neither was that…)
They made a movie about it. It’s called PI. Check it out.
ps: I’m lying to you.
There was those idiotic set of rules (and sub-rules, and sub-sub-rules, and exceptions to the rules, and exceptions to exceptions) that are often referred to as “The New Math”. These were supposed to make doing lengthy problems easy to do in your head. But as I’ve already hinted at it had so many rules that most people found it harder to use. The final nail in the coffin is that there is no proofs that it will work all the time.
Maybe he means short division? Hwar hwar hwar.
oh oh i know what it is ok you go into the nearest hardware store and you buy a power drill and then you ask the man at the counter if he has any “wood boring bits” he will “yes” then you buy them and then you put the wood bore in the power drill and put it up to your skull and pull the trigger. You wont be able to stop doing math after that. I promise you will not be disappointed with your results
I can do the maths now! :yes:
too small it should look like this
We are not using things like that even in college (computer sciences)
I actually remember I had a big discussion with my teacher about a math problem when I was 11 or such. I’d solved it in a way that he said wasn’t supposed to work at all. But he had no way of proving my method was wrong. I still hope to find that scrap of paper somewhere.
No doubt you are wishing for that “magic” formula that all schools are trying to hide from students.
The good news is that there is something out there that claims to do just this.
The bad news is that the author/publishers are cons out to gain your hard earned money in exchange for telling you what you can readily find easily for free in your library and quite useless if you are honest in the real world. Go to the “maths” section of your library or any library and look for books pertaining to this formula in similar words. Truth be told, the content of this elusive book contains nothing special, even though in bold there are words to the effect “The maths book the schools don’t want you to see”. What’s in it ? Well nothing that will change your life radically, just some simple tricks that will not help save the world, but can give you some bonus points if you are in a human power games scenario that involves numbers - that’s everyday, everywhere.
An example is when you have to manually copy a data series, and what you typed/ wrote does not equal to the sum of your original series. Now if there is hundreds of these numbers (as usually occurs for a payroll clerk as an example), your eyes will play tricks on you when you check the original against the copied series. If two corresponding digits of a number aren’t in order, your eyes will not necessarily detect this in the first or third trial. One solution is to substract the sums of both series and divide the remainder by nine. If it’s a whole number, then there is a strong chance you need to look for this particular issue.
The hardest interview ever in my life had one of the interviewers being one this con-men. He passively asked me tough questions like “Do numbers leap out for you ?” and “Do you have a spreadsheet for all your income and expenditure that you reconcile?” - “I have one” At the interview and later on he also gave me the impression of being a qualified accountant, someone senior with extensive experience of finance and other things. He is a thief, in a suit, and stealing big from another big thief in a suit. Interpret this as you may. But I gained something - a) the job, b) knowledge on how to “con” people by putting on a suit and by behaving kind of like the author of the book “Catch me if you can”.
EDIT: Don’t buy this book, get it from a library or go to just at your local bookstore
and “browse” the whole book
, only the pages where he tells his tricks is good and still perfectly valid decades later.
Ofcourse I am a professional with ethics, constrained by well intentioned boundaries, but when I do come across a dumb sucker (like my last temporary job client) I will take their money, because if I don’t someone else less needy probably will. If you want to know about that - it was initially based on some confusion about credit controllers not having time to allocate incoming funds to correct invoices and having awkward conversations with clients when calling for over due amounts. So I step to “allocate” these funds, being paid a good hourly rate, and that’s all I was supposed to do. I dragged this task from the initial one month to three months, because the boss lady (hottie!) asked me stay longer, since I was good cheerful team player (and one of the credit controllers resigned around that time). That I surfed the internet for three quarters of the day in full view of everyone walking by is another story and got a warning from the human resources lady (Colleen - not hot!) that I have already posted
in a new thread for all to view on the blenderartists forum.
I am really glad that you are asking these kinds of questions by the way, there are many ways to view the world, and many ways to keep safe. When you do come across these books, read them well, then devise your strategy, it’s not the knowledge, but how you use it that counts. My favourite so far is something called “Information Dissemination”.
I’m studying maths and we’re not using any kind of calculator. Not even an abacus.
…oh right, that may be because we math students don’t really care about putting numbers in for all the x’s and y’s in the equations
And no, there can’t be such an algorithm as with mathematical logic we can prove Goedel’s Incompleteness Theorem which states (put simple) that there are questions to which there are no answers (meaning you can’t decide if something is true or not). Which is apparently bad for an algorithm that would like to solve just about anything.
Example: the continuum-hypothesis.
Hooray for new math! It’s so simple, that only a child can do it! After all, the important thing is to understand what you’re doing… rather than to get the right answer!
I like your thinking! It’s so much more elegant to leave it in terms of variables. That’s why I hate experimental stuff: too much rounding and decimal places.
I have an 89, but I could get away with an 83 or 84. It is a damn cool machine, though.