Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 07-03-2003, 04:10 PM

lpetrich, wouldn't that yield 11000?

Farren · 07-03-2003, 04:18 PM

nope

Mageth · 07-03-2003, 04:24 PM

Think Boolean (or, rather, binary), Farren. I know what the factorial operator does.

Farren · 07-03-2003, 04:30 PM

Doh! You're right, of course

Kevin Dorner · 07-03-2003, 06:06 PM

cos(0) = 1 as well.

Loren Pechtel · 07-03-2003, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich
The key to this problem is what operations are permitted. Was that ever explicitly stated? "Mathematical operations" covers a very wide territory.

Here is a solution using Boolean operations and the factorial.

~ means "not" here.

((~0) + (~0) + (~0) + (~0))!

~0 is 1, and the rest quickly follows.

Disagree. It depends on what system you are using what the value of Not 0 is. Thus I do not consider it a valid approach.

Loren Pechtel · 07-03-2003, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kevin Dorner
cos(0) = 1 as well.

Ok, that one I will accept.

Farren · 07-03-2003, 06:54 PM

Loren

~0 may yield -1 in some languages, but the language is innacurate, not Ipetrichs math.

In pure binary math, the truth table for ~ is

A | ~A
--------
0 | 1
1 | 0

This is invariant and pure math. It is as certain as 1+1=2.

The error you're making is confusing the conventions adopted by certain programming languages with pure maths. To invalidate it as a solution, you would need to invalidate +/-/Cos and just about everything else on the grounds that a system can be concieved where the result is different.

For instance, + is invalid because 255 + 1 yields ERROR if the 255 is stored in a Byte variable (or zero if there is no overflow checking). This has little to do with actual math.

Farren · 07-03-2003, 07:16 PM

Chopped out follow up post because I realised that its not that simple. There is a possible difficulty here, sorry, otherwise only natural positive numbers can be used.

On the other hand, since the schema can be chosen, simply stating, "using 8-bit 2's complement Integer form", perform the following operation, the operation provided by ipetrich is valid.

Note: this is providing the context of the calculation, not introducing terms disallowed by the rules. Its the same as saying "that zero is not the letter O"

Bill Snedden · 07-03-2003, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kevin Dorner
cos(0) = 1 as well.

I thought about that, but is cos a mathematical operator or an operation?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-03-2003, 04:10 PM	#21
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	lpetrich, wouldn't that yield 11000?

07-03-2003, 04:18 PM	#22
Farren Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,194	nope

07-03-2003, 04:24 PM	#23
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Think Boolean (or, rather, binary), Farren. I know what the factorial operator does.

07-03-2003, 04:30 PM	#24
Farren Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,194	Doh! You're right, of course

07-03-2003, 06:06 PM	#25
Kevin Dorner Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 762	cos(0) = 1 as well.

07-03-2003, 06:54 PM	#28
Farren Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,194	Loren ~0 may yield -1 in some languages, but the language is innacurate, not Ipetrichs math. In pure binary math, the truth table for ~ is A \| ~A -------- 0 \| 1 1 \| 0 This is invariant and pure math. It is as certain as 1+1=2. The error you're making is confusing the conventions adopted by certain programming languages with pure maths. To invalidate it as a solution, you would need to invalidate +/-/Cos and just about everything else on the grounds that a system can be concieved where the result is different. For instance, + is invalid because 255 + 1 yields ERROR if the 255 is stored in a Byte variable (or zero if there is no overflow checking). This has little to do with actual math.

07-03-2003, 07:16 PM	#29
Farren Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,194	Chopped out follow up post because I realised that its not that simple. There is a possible difficulty here, sorry, otherwise only natural positive numbers can be used. On the other hand, since the schema can be chosen, simply stating, "using 8-bit 2's complement Integer form", perform the following operation, the operation provided by ipetrich is valid. Note: this is providing the context of the calculation, not introducing terms disallowed by the rules. Its the same as saying "that zero is not the letter O"

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.