Because math talk is the fuel that this forum runs on.

I'm too lazy to check if I said it here, but I put myself on a list of tutors for my old High School. During my added free time i'll be doing more math instead of German, so that works out (and it won't ask me for homework every fucking day and piss on my face if I actually, shocker, think of my Major) and get paid for it.

Last night when there were some quiet moments I skimmed through my Trigonometry book, since, well, lets say the Professor that taught me was hard to follow. Very very hard to follow. Example: A few days ago I wondered why sinx/cosx=tanx, and I worked it out and I thought it was neat. Then I realized thats in chapter 2 of a class I already took. Granted Calculus actually smooths these issues out with more applications you have to use, but I still have times where I have to check the double angle formulas etc.

This post has been edited by Elnendil: Oct 9 2010, 06:35 PM

I COULDN'T CATCH IT WHILE IT WAS PARALYZED :( IT ALWAYS STRUGGLEKILLED ITSELF.

GUITAR HERO YO. THEY APPARENTLY LIKE HEAVY METAL.

Clarify what...?

Huh? To figure out why, you'd need to define them first. What were the definitions you used to derive them?

As a kid, using SohCahToa I basically did sin/cos = (o/h)/(a/h) = o/a = tan. But that's not really a proof because it assumes SohCahToa, and I didn't know what SohCahToa was defined by. (I also used it to remember sin^2+cos^2 = (o/h)^2 + (a/h)^2 = (o^2 + a^2) / h^2 = h^2/h^2 = 1)

And that was my non-classtime so far today.

This post has been edited by H. Tsukiyono: Oct 9 2010, 10:58 PM

Even definitions have proofs. I'm going to drop this since its going nowhere.

I know why Sinx/Cosx=Tanx, and most identities can be derived from them. All I was saying is that I didn't touch on them enough. All I have to do is do practice problems so I no longer need to look at the book. It is nothing serious.


This is going nowhere. All i'm getting is aggravated, because i'm making some examples and you either dismiss them without much thought or you say that me saying something doesn't mean anything when it does (A definition has a proof). It would be better for me to just look at the book and ask questions.

EDIT: Just to clarify, i'm saying that I feel like I don't know enough, and just saying no isn't helping with my supposedly wrong reasoning, so its better to just drop this and I go study more.

This post has been edited by Elnendil: Oct 10 2010, 03:41 AM

Studying for practice PSAT

THE FOLLOWING POST IS A RANT, DONT READ IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME.

nice weekend, first its saturday and i had tests, two of them, at 8am. not cool, yet i had to wait 30 minutes because everyone at that school's staff is incompetent.

just to not stop here, father is at home the whoole weekend. which means, this is going to be... really, hateful.

and to complete my joy, all the champions at LoL are available, even the OP ones, and everyone is using the OP ones. also hackers are popping from almost EVERYWHERE. from the 5 battles i had today, i won 2... its NOT normal.

i dont feel like doing anything important.

also =__= i almost forgot. this week was supposed to be a all holiday week, with no classes and stuff, but my school is stupid and put tests between the damn holidays, so no one can have a life.

and i was planning to visit my friends again this weekend. i hate this all!

sigh.

I want to fucking kill my comp. sci. professor for being the biggest dumbass ever.

So basically he wants us to make this Action RPG in Java that is executed only from a GUI. Among a number of tedious and unnecessary tasks he wants us to do to add onto what we've already done on this project, he wants us to make a shit-ton of JPanels. Unfortunately, nobody really knows how to work with them because he forgot to post the lab where we were supposed to learn about them. He's also missed a lecture and on the one day we had to hear him explain this, he doesn't actually instruct us—no, he tells us to go and look it up. SO, WHAT WAS OUR TUITION GOING TOWARDS, AGAIN? PROFESSORS THAT TEACH US STUFF? THANKS DUDE.

I just sent him a three-paragraph email asking why separating JPanels into separate classes (which he wants us to do) doesn't work, because every time I try using code for one of my JPanel classes in my main GUI structure class, it comes up blank. Oh, and this is due tomorrow night.

Also he wants a high score panel. Last I checked, RPGs didn't have high scores.

I DUNNO ABOUT THIS ONE. I CAN ALMOST/KINDA/NOT REALLY THINK OF AT LEAST 3 THAT DO.

The only one I can think of is Super Paper Mario, and we all know how that was.

Definitions can't have proofs. Proofs are for statements, and are based off assumptions. Definitions are just notation, a shorthand for a property or set of properties. It's like proving that 1+1 = 2. The definition of 2 is 1 + 1. You can't prove anything about 2 until you already know what that symbol means, and what it means is 1+1. So you can't prove 1+1 = 2.

What you can do is prove that different definitions are EQUIVALENT. If you have property X with the name N (i.e. N is defined as "has property X"), and you prove that property X holds if and only if property Y holds, then Y is also a valid definition for N. But again, you have to have a definition to prove that other things are equivalent to it.

You'll have to be more precise with your language. I still don't know what you're trying to say.
I can't say I do. I know things ABOUT the trigonometric functions, but I don't know what can be used as the definition of them, so I can't say that that's a proof. (I guess we can use SohCahToa as the definition, now that I think about it.)


I'm NOT dismissing anything. I'm trying to figure out WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY, because what you're saying doesn't make sense to me in the literal sense, but I'm not sure if it's because you don't know the notation that I'm used to. I'm trying to eliminate possibilities.

Yo.

erm, Riviera?

I feel your pain though, some professors are just terrible and don't do their jobs (well if at all).

I'll just make this point I guess. The book that i'm using in question doesn't call what we've been discussing definitions, and goes out of its way to prove the statements (If a|b and a|c, then a|(bx+cy) for some x and y is defined as a theorem in my book and has a proof for it). There are actual "definitions" in the book, like d=(a,b), and thats stupid to prove because its a definition of what the greatest common divisor is, its just the notation you're supposed to use. Thats really about in on me using the definition here. If you're saying that the concept is so simple that its practically the definition, I suppose I can agree there.

Aside from that, like I said before, i'm going to stick to the book.


The reason behind me saying i'll just stick to the book and asking questions is because i'm assuming you've had more mathematical experience than I have (I'm assuming you've passed Number Theory). This is also one of my first proof courses, so proving a lot of statements I haven't considered to prove is somewhat new to me. Thats probably why i'm not making much sense to you, alongside possibly differences in how our professors and the book tackled the concept for us.

This is the book i've been using: http://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Introduct...n/dp/0881338362

Yeah, you're right. But still, did that score really matter? It was kinda unnecessary, although Riviera would have felt unfinished without it.

I never did play Super Paper Mario, but I played Paper Mario: TTYD and that didn't have a high score. I guess Mario games would be the counter to the "RPGs don't have high scores" assumption, although I think it's easy to confuse collection mechanics with high score mechanics.

HEY RAI WHY WON'T MY JPANEL SHOW UP WHEN I MAKE IT AS A SEPARATE CLASS AND TRY TO CALL IT FROM A TABBED PANE CLASS, BUT THEN WHEN I MOVE THE CODE TO THE TABBED PANE CLASS WITHOUT CHANGING ANYTHING IT SUDDENLY APPEARS?


EDIT: NEVER MIND APPARENTLY JPANEL GETTERS WORK.

This post has been edited by Hayate: Oct 10 2010, 09:30 PM