flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > What is the best pie you can get with 9 digits?

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 27, 28, 29  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
The_Grey_Beast wrote:
Z^(1/dx)!
And it's value is ... ??? I will accept if you can give it's specific value and show where it fits on the number line.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 12:49
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
MHajduk wrote:
Image
Very nice description. Thanks for the effort.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 12:50
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
revolution wrote:
And it's value is ... ??? I will accept if you can give it's specific value and show where it fits on the number line.
Well it's bigger than my previous one.

and I don't think I can provide a value for it (in the normal sense), that would take an almost infinite number of characters.

what does '$' mean? never seen it in any books. :hmm:
Post 08 Mar 2008, 12:57
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MHajduk



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6034
Location: Poland
MHajduk
revolution wrote:
Very nice description. Thanks for the effort.
You are welcome. Very Happy
Post 08 Mar 2008, 12:58
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
The_Grey_Beast wrote:
what does '$' mean? never seen it in any books. :hmm:
The link was posted on the very first page, but I will repeat it here since it is so far back now.

Superfactorial
Post 08 Mar 2008, 13:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
To be honest this superfactorial thing is just a definition by some guy, and seems totally new (like 1995) and also seem to have an "alternative definition".

So can I come up with some new symbols as well like Clifford Pickover or whoever did this '$' symbol? This could fit easily in 1 char! (I can define '#' hehe).


But then just for completeness:

Z^(1/dx)$
Post 08 Mar 2008, 13:28
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
Addressing the first of my three questions concerning Goedel and 'gimel', Tomasz wrote:
...this whole thing {i.e. Dean's criticism of Goedel} is more similar to some kind of religious crusade than to a real justified mathematical reasoning.
Perhaps I do not correctly understand Dean:

Gödel proved
~P(x,y) & Q)g,y) in other words ~P(x,y) & Q)g,y) is a mathematical version of the liar paradox. It is a statement X that says X is not provable. Therefore if X is provable it is not provable a contradiction....
In brief, and maybe too brief, Goedel appears to have relied upon Principia Mathematica (P.M.), 2nd edition, in which the authors, Russell and Whitehead, offered a proposition, the "axiom of reducibility" subsequently retracted, shortly after the book's publication, a fact known to Goedel, according to Dean. I remain confused about the issue, but I do not accept the position that Dean's argument is hollow, lacking merit, or based upon faith rather than reason (religious fervor). I hesitate to indict P.M., but, I am not confident in Goedel after reading Dean. Cantor, however is another matter:
MHajduk wrote:
This notation {originates} with Georg Cantor...

I am willing to accept the notion that he employed greek symbols, e.g. epsilon, but not beth (second letter of phoenician alphabet, nor aleph, first letter). Why confound Greek, Latin and Semitic alphabets, in elaborating a science of numbers? What do mathematicians gain by this seemingly ad hoc mixture? If one seeks the source, we should then return to Egyptian Hieroglyphs, from which the Semitic alphabet arose. The concepts involved in evolution of Cantor's theories are suitably non-intuitive, so the description and definition of these arcane ideas ought to be crystal clear, instead of muddy, secondary to employment of obscure terminology (aleph, beth) and symbols (c) with meanings contrary to their original notions. Do you suppose that when Goedel and Einstein were walking together, every evening, at Princeton, they were engaged in schizophrenic dialogue, each one talking about "c" with a completely different meaning? Since, at least in my unimaginative opinion, Goedel's work is intimately involved in the main topic of this thread, I hope someone will elaborate the answers, if they are known, to my other two questions concerning him, in the earlier post.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 13:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
The_Grey_Beast wrote:
To be honest this superfactorial thing is just a definition by some guy, and seems totally new (like 1995) and also seem to have an "alternative definition".

So can I come up with some new symbols as well like Clifford Pickover or whoever did this '$' symbol? This could fit easily in 1 char! (I can define '#' hehe).
Okay, but you must get your new symbol accepted into more places than just the fasm forum. If you can show it being used in maths then I am prepared to accept it.
The_Grey_Beast wrote:
Z^(1/dx)$
Why limit yourself when you can do this: (1/dx)$$$.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 13:55
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
@tom tobias: having completely different meanings for the same symbol is quite common in cases where the fields are different. In this case, c in physics can't be confused with c in mathematics because when you discuss one topic, or the other, it is known from the context what each symbol represents.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 13:59
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
revolution wrote:
Okay, but you must get your new symbol accepted into more places than just the fasm forum. If you can show it being used in maths then I am prepared to accept it.
Well to be honest I have never seen that symbol, but perhaps I did not read enough books, so ok my bad.

The_Grey_Beast wrote:
Why limit yourself when you can do this: (1/dx)$$$.
Well, in factorials, '!!' is the double factorial which is smaller (but of course I don't know much about '$').
Post 08 Mar 2008, 14:03
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
The_Grey_Beast wrote:
Well, in factorials, '!!' is the double factorial which is smaller (but of course I don't know much about '$').
For the purposes of this discussion I am going to assume that x$$ = (x$)$. It makes the discussion more fun that way.

And I tell a small secret here: I allow it that way because I don't think it will help anyone to get the biggest answer, hehe.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 14:08
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MHajduk



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6034
Location: Poland
MHajduk
tom tobias wrote:
I am willing to accept the notion that he employed greek symbols, e.g. epsilon, but not beth (second letter of phoenician alphabet, nor aleph, first letter). Why confound Greek, Latin and Semitic alphabets, in elaborating a science of numbers? What do mathematicians gain by this seemingly ad hoc mixture?
I don't see any problem in using Hebrew (and any other) alphabet in mathematics. Especially when it give us unique names of defined objects.

This "ad hoc mixture" is a heritage of very long history (~5000 years or more) of mathematics (Egypt, Babylon, ancient Greece, Arabic period...). By this "mixture" mathematics gain new conventions of notation and specific beauty of mathematic formulas. Georg Cantor's set theory isn't some kind of Kabbalah as some of you probably think. If you don't "feel" this beauty, you aren't born to be mathematician.

Assume that I will create a new theory and use Coptic or Cyrillic letters and this theory will be widely accepted then these characters could enrich set of mathematic symbols. There is nothing wrong with it. Symbols are only some kind of tool for describing ideas. Very good if these symbols are readable and distinguishable.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 14:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
asmhack



Joined: 01 Feb 2008
Posts: 431
asmhack
the pages of this topic is the number ? Razz
Post 08 Mar 2008, 14:31
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
This was not meant to be a trick question and so far no one has taken it that way, ... until now.

Just for fun, I have reinterpreted the title (What is the largest number you can write in 9 characters?) like this:

Code:
9          9  9          9  9         9  999999999     999999999999  9999999999
99         9  9          9  99       99  9        9    9             9         9
9 9        9  9          9  9 9     9 9  9         9   9             9          9
9  9       9  9          9  9  9   9  9  9         9   9             9          9
9   9      9  9          9  9   9 9   9  9        9    9             9         9
9    9     9  9          9  9    9    9  9999999999    9999999999    9999999999
9     9    9  9          9  9         9  9         9   9             9     9
9      9   9  9          9  9         9  9          9  9             9      9
9       9  9  9          9  9         9  9          9  9             9       9
9        9 9  9          9  9         9  9          9  9             9        9
9         99   9        9   9         9  9         9   9             9         9
9          9    99999999    9         9  9999999999    999999999999  9          9
    
So before anyone else tries it, I will disallow it, hehe, you all missed your chance there.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 14:59
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
Laughing Laughing Laughing
Post 08 Mar 2008, 15:00
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
revolution wrote:
...having completely different meanings for the same symbol is quite common in cases where the fields are different.
I would agree with you, were it not for Goedel, who is intimitely associated with both fields, and whose writings overlap both fields. He was Einstein's foremost intellectual companion in New Jersey. Goedel's own scholarly contributions, traverse both Einstein and Schroedinger, on the one hand, and Cantor on the other, hence, it is not wise to introduce a "new" meaning for the time honored symbol, c, under the guise of contributing novel scholarship in an application related to Cantor's direction of research--unless you wish to suggest that this useage originates with Cantor, himself.
revolution wrote:
...I have reinterpreted the title ...
Yes, you have contributed to further confounding the mediocrity of English, (with MANY meanings for a single word,) with a supposedly clever interpretation of the word "write", for which "print" is a synonym. If you will, more accurately, write: "print" at the outset of this thread, instead of "write", then, you will fool fewer people, but you should understand that this bit of cleverness is based not upon profundity with mathematics or logic, but rather with your admittedly superb skills with English--whose defects as lanuage of international communication are apparent from your illustration.
MHajduk wrote:
I don't see any problem in using Hebrew (and any other) alphabet in mathematics....
If one's goal is clarity, then writing in Sanscrit (one of those important contributors to the history of mathematics) or Chinese HanZi, (language of the inventors of the abacus) is wasting people's time, unless they are already knowledgeable about those languages....Coptic, as far as I know, is a "dead" lanugage--One may as well invoke Mayan or Aztec or Cham. The main thesis I have presented remains unrefuted: I claim that Cantor's work is NOT improved by introducing exotic alphabets. I suspect, though without evidence, that these Hebreic novelties, viz aleph and beth and gimel, reflect NOT some elegant method of augmenting Cantor, but rather reflect the zionists desire to spread Hebrew throughout all disciplines, regardless of pertinance.
MHajduk wrote:
Georg Cantor's set theory isn't some kind of Kabbalah as some of you probably think.
Please exclude me from that group. I don't consider Cantor's theory to have any relationship to Jewish mysticism.
Though born in Russia, in St. Petersburg, Cantor, a Lutheran, moved to Germany as a boy, and completed his education there, writing his Doctoral dissertation in Latin, accordingly, I have no idea why cher colleague MHajduk introduces the notion of "kabbalah"to categorize Cantor's theory? I certainly don't view Cantor's scholarship as an example of Hebreic folderol.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 17:54
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
tom tobias wrote:
MHajduk wrote:
I don't see any problem in using Hebrew (and any other) alphabet in mathematics....
If one's goal is clarity, then writing in Sanscrit (one of those important contributors to the history of mathematics) or Chinese HanZi, (language of the inventors of the abacus) is wasting people's time, unless they are already knowledgeable about those languages....
I don't think the language is important, the alphabet can be separated off and used as a basis for symbols. The symbols are being reinterpreted into some mathematical meaning anyway so there is no need to understand the associated language to know the meaning of the symbol in the mathematical context.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 18:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MHajduk



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6034
Location: Poland
MHajduk
tom tobias wrote:
Do you suppose that when Goedel and Einstein were walking together, every evening, at Princeton, they were engaged in schizophrenic dialogue, each one talking about "c" with a completely different meaning?
Image
tom tobias wrote:
I suspect, though without evidence, that these Hebreic novelties, viz aleph and beth and gimel, reflect NOT some elegant method of augmenting Cantor, but rather reflect the zionists desire to spread Hebrew throughout all disciplines, regardless of pertinance.
I'm curious, are you anti-semite tom? I have no problem with Jews and Jewish culture. And I'm not a Jew of course. Strange, isn't it? But you will never understand it.

There is no need to "spread" Jewish influences in any discipline of science, because... Jewish scientists were there since several hundreds years. Their contribution to our (European) science is INESTIMABLE. But how Europeans "paid" them for it? Answer is very simple: HOLOCAUST.
tom tobias wrote:
I claim that Cantor's work is NOT improved by introducing exotic alphabets.
Fortunately you are alone in your opinion. It was personal Cantor's decision.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 19:07
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
MHajduk wrote:
I'm curious, are you anti-semite tom? I have no problem with Jews and Jewish culture. And I'm not a Jew of course. Strange, isn't it? But you will never understand it. ...
Umm, okay, can I strongly suggest we try to stay a bit closer to the topic.

Thanks.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 19:18
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MHajduk



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6034
Location: Poland
MHajduk
revolution wrote:
MHajduk wrote:
I'm curious, are you anti-semite tom? I have no problem with Jews and Jewish culture. And I'm not a Jew of course. Strange, isn't it? But you will never understand it. ...
Umm, okay, can I strongly suggest we try to stay a bit closer to the topic.

Thanks.
revolution
It was necessary, because we should stop tom tobias in spreading fanatic hatred to religions, other cultures and some nations.
Post 08 Mar 2008, 19:27
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 27, 28, 29  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.