# Symbolic Maths Society Watch

Announcements

This discussion is closed.

Report

#381

(Original post by

I believe Dalek is referring to the shape enclosed by those three circles. I do not know whether the shape has a name; you are the BMO man so you will know more of this geometry than I do.

**DJMayes**)I believe Dalek is referring to the shape enclosed by those three circles. I do not know whether the shape has a name; you are the BMO man so you will know more of this geometry than I do.

(Original post by

Ahhh right, I don't know the name of that either.

I thought Dalek had made a miraculous discovery....

**0x2a**)Ahhh right, I don't know the name of that either.

I thought Dalek had made a miraculous discovery....

Incidentally the sickle-like things stuck to each vertex is called an arbelos (which is in fact also a hyperbolic triangle).

0

(Original post by

Is that what he means? It looks suspiciously like a hyperbolic triangle.

Incidentally the sickle-like things stuck to each vertex is called an arbelos (which is in fact also a hyperbolic triangle).

**ukdragon37**)Is that what he means? It looks suspiciously like a hyperbolic triangle.

Incidentally the sickle-like things stuck to each vertex is called an arbelos (which is in fact also a hyperbolic triangle).

0

Report

#383

(Original post by

it can't be a hyperbolic triangle because as one can see from the diagram the circicles don't actually have any real angles, if you said it did have angles they would all be 0 degrees/radians.

**Dalek1099**)it can't be a hyperbolic triangle because as one can see from the diagram the circicles don't actually have any real angles, if you said it did have angles they would all be 0 degrees/radians.

**intersections**of circles, at which there certainly are angles. And yes, the angles in this case would be zero, but that does not mean there are no angles and further it does not prevent it at all from being a hyperbolic triangle.

Also see this with an applet that constructs hyperbolic triangles. Your "circircle" is merely one particular case (which it even mentions in the text of that webpage: "As you drag a vertex to infinity (the boundary of the disk), the angle at that vertex goes to zero. ").

0

Report

#385

(Original post by

This is still going?! Christ

**MangoFreak**)This is still going?! Christ

0

Report

#386

(Original post by

Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

**Khallil**)Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

0

Report

#387

**Khallil**)

Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

0

Report

#388

**Khallil**)

Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

edit: I've found the symbolic maths wikia and I'm baffled

0

**Khallil**)

Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

0

Report

#390

(Original post by

Its new maths based on what we can see in maths like

**Dalek1099**)Its new maths based on what we can see in maths like

**if 4x=16 x=4 but this must mean 44 could equal 16**thus giving us the basic symbolic maths theory that 2 numbers that are close together multiply and hence we can find the value of symbols by analyzing what happens when we remove a symbol from an equation eg 4+3=7 but if we remove the + symbol it becomes 43 which in this case is 4 and 3 close together so its 12 so the value of the symbol is 7/12.From this new maths you can create all sorts of maths like squaring the ratio where for example if you have two numbers a:b in a real ratio(if you share £2 in a ratio 1:4 then the real ratio is £0.4:£1.6 for example) then with the symbol its a+b and without its ab so the value of :=(a+b)/ab then if you square the ratio so you get a::b or a :^2 b and if we let it equal c:d where the ratio constant((a+b)/ab) is the same then c+d=((a+b)(a+b))/(ab) and cd equals a+b and you can use the quadratic formula to solve.**here**.

Also I noticed an unmatched spoiler tag in your sig

0

Report

#391

**Khallil**)

Is this whole thread a joke, or is there some actual maths in it that's beyond me and I can't understand?

0

Report

#392

(Original post by

Have you seen his sig? He's already predicted his own A-level and STEP grades

**Felix Felicis**)Have you seen his sig? He's already predicted his own A-level and STEP grades

I used to think his sig was a joke base on the TSR boasters but it seems he's serious!

0

__4__=16.

0

Report

#394

(Original post by

You have to think laterally about it if 4x=16 then x=4 if we substitute x back in place of the 4 then we get 4

**Dalek1099**)You have to think laterally about it if 4x=16 then x=4 if we substitute x back in place of the 4 then we get 4

__4__=16.
1

Report

#395

(Original post by

Exactly what I was thinking, I'm lost

edit: I've found the symbolic maths wikia and I'm baffled

**Where'sPerry?**)Exactly what I was thinking, I'm lost

edit: I've found the symbolic maths wikia and I'm baffled

0

Report

#396

**Dalek1099**)

You have to think laterally about it if 4x=16 then x=4 if we substitute x back in place of the 4 then we get 4

__4__=16.

Also, when two letters are together it means multiply, what if I said 4 * x = 16, what would you say then?

Posted from TSR Mobile

0

(Original post by

This actually hurts me to read, and anyway, how would you go about actually proving 44=16 ( and don't go dividing by zero, I don't care about what rules there are in your made up maths, that doesn't work)

Also, when two letters are together it means multiply, what if I said 4 * x = 16, what would you say then?

Posted from TSR Mobile

**majmuh24**)This actually hurts me to read, and anyway, how would you go about actually proving 44=16 ( and don't go dividing by zero, I don't care about what rules there are in your made up maths, that doesn't work)

Also, when two letters are together it means multiply, what if I said 4 * x = 16, what would you say then?

Posted from TSR Mobile

but looking at lateral solutions this isn't always the case if we use the algebraic algorithm(a*b=ab).

Symbols is effectively the Science of Notation-investigation how symbols affect expressions and looking for lateral solutions by applying rules of notation in usual circumstances.

0

Report

#398

Seriously Dalek, give it up. It's not maths because it doesn't follow the axioms of mathematics. You're STILL making a fool of yourself. All the time you're using to develop these SY modules could actually be put towards your studies.

0

Report

#399

(Original post by

4*x=16 x=4 4*4=16 effectively by saying when two letters together they multiply must mean that 44 can equal 16 if we use the notation ab=a*b 44=4*4=16 usually ab=10a+b 44=40+4=44

but looking at lateral solutions this isn't always the case if we use the algebraic algorithm(a*b=ab).

Symbols is effectively the Science of Notation-investigation how symbols affect expressions and looking for lateral solutions by applying rules of notation in usual circumstances.

**Dalek1099**)4*x=16 x=4 4*4=16 effectively by saying when two letters together they multiply must mean that 44 can equal 16 if we use the notation ab=a*b 44=4*4=16 usually ab=10a+b 44=40+4=44

but looking at lateral solutions this isn't always the case if we use the algebraic algorithm(a*b=ab).

Symbols is effectively the Science of Notation-investigation how symbols affect expressions and looking for lateral solutions by applying rules of notation in usual circumstances.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=05WS0WN7zMQ

Also, space out your paragraphs properly, it makes then a nightmare to read.

Posted from TSR Mobile

0

Report

#400

Just read those papers, I don't think I've ever seen anything so mundane in my entire life. 10/10

0

X

new posts

Back

to top

to top