Computer Science Canada New Math contest!!! (10 bits) |
Author: | Corybu [ Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:25 am ] |
Post subject: | New Math contest!!! (10 bits) |
Ok, whoever gets this first wins. Theres a catch though, it has to be submitted in a turing program! Just cause you all seem to dislike turing, lol. What is 2.... +..... 3? *DUNDUNDUNnnnnnnNNNNnnnnn* *Thunder crackles* Tough one eh? GET ON IT!!!! And neatness counts for the program! I want comments, and it has to have some form of eye candy. lol. |
Author: | Homer_simpson [ Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: New Math contest!!! (10 bits) |
Corybu wrote: Ok, whoever gets this first wins.
Theres a catch though, it has to be submitted in a turing program! Just cause you all seem to dislike turing, lol. What is 2.... +..... 3? *DUNDUNDUNnnnnnnNNNNnnnnn* *Thunder crackles* Tough one eh? GET ON IT!!!! And neatness counts for the program! I want comments, and it has to have some form of eye candy. lol. what da hell does 2.... +..... 3 mean anyway?! |
Author: | Corybu [ Fri Oct 03, 2003 10:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
the ....'s represent a dramatic pause... the question is 2+3. and nobody wants to do it apparently, lol. |
Author: | Tony [ Fri Oct 03, 2003 11:50 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
and tony takes the lead!
|
Author: | Corybu [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:44 am ] | ||||
Post subject: | |||||
tony wrote: and tony takes the lead!
And tony fails basic math!!! Wait, lets quote that, just one more time! Quote: put "2+2 = " + answer
Ouch. That has to hurt. Sorry tony, you fail. (and Wheres the eye candy?) (and a more simple approach...
one line. nice, neat, simple... still no eye candy though) |
Author: | Tony [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:51 am ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
oh, boo hoo
So in reality, 2 + 2 does in fact equals to 5 |
Author: | Corybu [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:43 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Aside from most of that being entirely pointless... Quote: x+x = x
Therefore x must equal 0... and 2x would equal 0 as well. using that 'formula' if you can call it that... you could say that any number equals any other number... ie where it says add 3 to each side, you could add any number... say you add 4, it would be 6=5 so then you could argue that my origional question's answer would be 6... (6=5 which equals 6=2+3) So... it doesnt make sense, lol. Usually I tell people that I can proove that 2+2=5 and then they tall me to proove it, so I ask for a valuable item of theirs, and tell them if they want it back, then 2+2=5. it works everytime, lol. |
Author: | Catalyst [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:51 am ] |
Post subject: | |
first line gives it away Quote: x^2=ax since a=x x^2=x^2 x=x (what a discovery ) |
Author: | Tony [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:49 am ] |
Post subject: | |
well x^2=ax is needed for the following line cuz on the next line we basically take away itself from both sides, bringing them both to zero. x^2-a^2 = ax-a^2 is same as x^2-x^2 = ax-ax so both sides equals zero... then we take those zeros, divide them by zeros and we get some crazy results The whole point of introducing A into the equation was in hopes of throwing people of guard during -a^2 line. |
Author: | Corybu [ Sat Oct 04, 2003 3:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Lol, it was a good try. you still loose though. |
Author: | DanShadow [ Thu Dec 11, 2003 4:53 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | .. | ||
Hmm...Hey Corybu...seeing as nobody actually answered the question correctly... here it is: 2+3=5 muahaha!
Woot, got it! 10 bits, or no, heh. |
Author: | CITC [ Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:46 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
um, so what was the actual point of this post? |
Author: | poly [ Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
to write a code in turing to get the answer and to get some bits |
Author: | w00rm [ Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
sorry to bust your bubble dude buy your equation is completly wrong, if a=x then there is no way you can change the value of the variables just by manipulating by using squares and dividing |
Author: | Mazer [ Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Yes, I'm pretty sure that was just a joke. Tony likes to prove 0 = 1 and stuff like that, it's fun. But we know the difference between jokes and mathematical discoveries... in fact, we knew the difference on Saturday October the fourth, in the year 2003 at 2:49 in the morning WHEN HE POSTED THAT! I don't mean to sound pissed off but how far back did you have to go to dig up this thread? |
Author: | Maverick [ Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:08 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
There easy enuf |
Author: | shorthair [ Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Can we just kill this thread , i dont wanna see it again , there have been so many answeres , peopel just keep bringing it up , i mean at least make a new retardedly easy question |
Author: | jenkl [ Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
lol. what you did is the reason why you cant divide by 0. |
Author: | Delta [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:43 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
ok since well the simplest way to do this is
I guess I win right... most efficient way of doing it... with the least amount of lines... no variables needed since all he asked for was the answer ... and well thats what I gave him right? |