another quick math question for 100

[PaddyLong]

SilverSprite wrote:

hmm i think he was just kidding?

doesn't seem like it :/

[bugzpodder]

eggplant_burger wrote:

that's a piddling argument. it can be proven that it is a valid proof.

since there are 2 variables to a degree greater than 1 on the left side, and only 1 variable to a degree greater than 1 on the right side, the left will increase more quickly than the right. So if they are already not equal at a point where the values of the left and right side fall into a pattern, they will never be equal. I think that the maximum possible natural number in Turing (4294967294) is reasonably high enough to assume that a pattern will be established. It's like using limits... you don't quite show it exactly, but it's so close it doesn't make a difference.

you may pull it off if its only one variable (after you show exactly when RHS>LHS for all x>x0, and test all solution less than or equal to x0), but with these multiple variables, no.

[eggplant_burger]

Fine, then I'm wrong.

Whatever.

[Corybu]

Im no math genious, but is the answer 7?

Lol, j/k guys. This is crazy, I dont know how any of you could rack your brains to try and figure this out... When will you ever use it? (outside of forum debates)

My math skills are pretty basic... maybe slitly above average, but if any of you understand what is in this thread, you scare me, lol.