Is 3.10 a greater integer than 3.9? Call all the Math Exiles

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

True story: My sister's name is Jenny and that was her phone number when the song came out. The phone company (yes... there was just one phone company) changed it for her. She's not a crack-head though.

No one believes you.

Thanks for this made up anecdote Joe Biden.

You need to find another playground.

"

Why you think you own this one?

Sorry been here longer than you gramps.

"

GoldDragon32 wrote:

"

The only answer I can come up with is that 3.10 is greater than 3.1. But I am pretty sure from the math class that you can add as many zeros as you want after a decimal point and it does not change the value of an integer.

Decimals are used differently in Software revision numbers then they are in actual math. They do not denote powers of 10 at all. You can even have multiple decimals in a revision number, something that never happens in math. 3.10 is indeed bigger then 3.1 for the same reason 10 is bigger then 1, the decimal is not mathematical.

YOur post makes as much sense as seeing Febuary 4th expressed as 2/4 and wondering why you're dividing the month by the day - the Slash isn't intended to denote division in that context, and when you see a US phone number, the parenthesis around the area code is not an order of operations indicator, and the dash between the first 3 and the last 4 digits is not an indication for subtraction.

If I tell you my phone numbers is 867-5309, I'm not saying my phone numbers is -4442. It's not a mathematical expression. Revision numbers are similar.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Why you think you own this one?

Sorry been here longer than you gramps.

"

ivqancorp wrote:

Don't laugh, serious question. I love learning the math. Shouldn't 4.0 come after 3.9? I haven't played POE in a while, been having a blast with Wolcen, so I am a little confused here.

The only answer I can come up with is that 3.10 is greater than 3.1. But I am pretty sure from the math class that you can add as many zeros as you want after a decimal point and it does not change the value of an integer.

IIRC my theory is:

Spoiler

So for example 1 and 1.0 or 1.00 are all the same number.

The reason I am not sure is because in AP Calculus I learned about "i" which is -1^1/2, used when taking the square root of a negative number, which before than I did not think was possible. Similarly recently I learned that 1 + 1 = 3. So I think maybe this probably has some similar logic. I'd love to learn some new mathematics.

My theorem to prove 1 + 1 = 3

1 = 1

41 – 40 = 61 – 60

16 + 25 – 40 = 36 + 25 – 60

4² + 5² – 2 * 4 * 5 = 6² + 5² – 2 * 6 * 5

(4 – 5)² = (6 – 5)²

4 – 5 = 6 – 5

4 = 6

2 = 3

1 + 1 = 3

Similarly I believe GGG may have accidentally (or purposely, I am not sure) proved 3.10 > 3.1. I don't know the theorem but I would guess 3 digits are more than 2.

Also if you are not good at the math then please dont post in this thread.Thank you all, looking forward to March 13th.

"

Redthorne82 wrote:

"

ivqancorp wrote:

Don't laugh, serious question. I love learning the math. Shouldn't 4.0 come after 3.9? I haven't played POE in a while, been having a blast with Wolcen, so I am a little confused here.

The only answer I can come up with is that 3.10 is greater than 3.1. But I am pretty sure from the math class that you can add as many zeros as you want after a decimal point and it does not change the value of an integer.

IIRC my theory is:

Spoiler

So for example 1 and 1.0 or 1.00 are all the same number.

The reason I am not sure is because in AP Calculus I learned about "i" which is -1^1/2, used when taking the square root of a negative number, which before than I did not think was possible. Similarly recently I learned that 1 + 1 = 3. So I think maybe this probably has some similar logic. I'd love to learn some new mathematics.

My theorem to prove 1 + 1 = 3

1 = 1

41 – 40 = 61 – 60

16 + 25 – 40 = 36 + 25 – 60

4² + 5² – 2 * 4 * 5 = 6² + 5² – 2 * 6 * 5

(4 – 5)² = (6 – 5)²

4 – 5 = 6 – 5

4 = 6

2 = 3

1 + 1 = 3

Similarly I believe GGG may have accidentally (or purposely, I am not sure) proved 3.10 > 3.1. I don't know the theorem but I would guess 3 digits are more than 2.

Also if you are not good at the math then please dont post in this thread.Thank you all, looking forward to March 13th.

This is the problem right here. Bold above.

It's (4² + 5²) - 2(4*5) = (6² + 5²) - 2(6*5)

Even if it was possible to just add 2 to each side (it's not), you'd still have (4² + 5²) - (4*5) which isn't the same as (4-5)². The same goes for the other side of the equation.

I know this isn't remotely what the topic is, but ouchies at broken math theorems. :D

"

ivqancorp wrote:

4 – 5 = 6 – 5 (This is where your hypothesis fails)

4 = 6

2 = 3

1 + 1 = 3

"

Sol_Starving wrote:

"

Redthorne82 wrote:

"

ivqancorp wrote:

Don't laugh, serious question. I love learning the math. Shouldn't 4.0 come after 3.9? I haven't played POE in a while, been having a blast with Wolcen, so I am a little confused here.

The only answer I can come up with is that 3.10 is greater than 3.1. But I am pretty sure from the math class that you can add as many zeros as you want after a decimal point and it does not change the value of an integer.

IIRC my theory is:

Spoiler

So for example 1 and 1.0 or 1.00 are all the same number.

The reason I am not sure is because in AP Calculus I learned about "i" which is -1^1/2, used when taking the square root of a negative number, which before than I did not think was possible. Similarly recently I learned that 1 + 1 = 3. So I think maybe this probably has some similar logic. I'd love to learn some new mathematics.

My theorem to prove 1 + 1 = 3

1 = 1

41 – 40 = 61 – 60

16 + 25 – 40 = 36 + 25 – 60

4² + 5² – 2 * 4 * 5 = 6² + 5² – 2 * 6 * 5

(4 – 5)² = (6 – 5)²

4 – 5 = 6 – 5

4 = 6

2 = 3

1 + 1 = 3

Similarly I believe GGG may have accidentally (or purposely, I am not sure) proved 3.10 > 3.1. I don't know the theorem but I would guess 3 digits are more than 2.

Also if you are not good at the math then please dont post in this thread.Thank you all, looking forward to March 13th.

This is the problem right here. Bold above.

It's (4² + 5²) - 2(4*5) = (6² + 5²) - 2(6*5)

Even if it was possible to just add 2 to each side (it's not), you'd still have (4² + 5²) - (4*5) which isn't the same as (4-5)². The same goes for the other side of the equation.

I know this isn't remotely what the topic is, but ouchies at broken math theorems. :D

no that passage is legit.
as i said clearly and someone else implied, the problem is the next passage, square rooting mindlessly.
when you do something in math you have to know what you are doing and WHY you can do it.
you can reach that passage you pointed wrong only using algebric axioms and sort axioms and there is nothing wrong.

this is the wrong passage, op maybe (probably) is a troll but i'm surprised nobody cleared this in page 1.

(4 – 5)² = (6 – 5)²

|-1| = |1|

1 = 1