x^0 = 1 | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (1)
010101
...and 572 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614087
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
x^0 = 1
 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 01:51 [#01008463]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/62707.html

If you define exponents as repeated multiplication, just as
multiplication is repeated addition, you can visualize it
geometrically in your mind in a "copy and paste" sort of
way.

for example 2^1 =
@@

2^2 =
(@@)copy paste @@
=@@@@

2^3 =
(@@@@)copy paste @@@@
=@@@@@@@@

etc.

but 2^0 makes no logical geometric sense I'm pretty sure.
Instead it has been conventionally defined as one just so it
will fit in with the patterns produced by the other
exponents.



 

offline Erronous from Netherlands, The on 2003-12-29 01:54 [#01008465]
Points: 2519 Status: Lurker



yes that's right..............??


 

offline Jazembo from The Earth ball on 2003-12-29 02:01 [#01008468]
Points: 2788 Status: Regular



so what use is all that?


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 02:03 [#01008469]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



I heard that otto von schirach spends his time tinkering
with perverted number systems... such as where the first
digit is base two, the second digit is base three, the third
digit is base four etc. He figured out how to perform all of
the normal mathematical operations using this system. This,
I believe, somehow permitted him to build his cyborg hand.


 

offline Erronous from Netherlands, The on 2003-12-29 02:06 [#01008471]
Points: 2519 Status: Lurker



actually it does make sense, you have to visualize the limit
of the exponent to zero:

2^x with x=lim(a->0), it's perfectly right.

0 is nothing else than a very small number like
0,000000000000000000001, as you can't do math with
'nothing'.

on the other hand=you can't do 1/0= because that's infinite.
but 1/x=999999999999999999999etc


 

offline Jazembo from The Earth ball on 2003-12-29 02:06 [#01008472]
Points: 2788 Status: Regular



can it make me rich?


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 02:08 [#01008473]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



Dr. Math is cool. I saw him live once, about a year ago at a
local rave. The aura of number two pencils, ecstacy and
mathematical insight was unique.


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2003-12-29 02:09 [#01008474]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator



i doubt it will make you rich...but you will be enlightened


 

offline Jazembo from The Earth ball on 2003-12-29 02:11 [#01008475]
Points: 2788 Status: Regular | Followup to tolstoyed: #01008474



:) I am well on the way to finding truth, I have almost
completed phase one and shall soon be ready for phase two
'the journey'


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 02:15 [#01008478]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker | Followup to Erronous: #01008471



hmm... that didn't make any damn sense. Thanks. I'm pretty
sure that "0" stands for "nothing" not "a very very small
number". That's why it can be used as a placeholder in the
decimal system. the number "1305" has "zero" or "no" amount
in the 10's place. I have seriously farted once or twice as
I wrote this. I forget, but I'm pretty sure it was twice
rather than once.


 

offline mappatazee from ¨y¨z¨| (Burkina Faso) on 2003-12-29 02:18 [#01008479]
Points: 14294 Status: Lurker | Followup to w M w: #01008463



No, x^0=1 very definitely.
x^(1/2) is the square root of x
x^(1/3) is the cube root of x
x^(1/4) is the fourth root of x
x^(1/5) is the fifth root of x
x^(1/6) is the sixth root of x
etc., and this approaches 1 as the exponent gets closer and
closer to 0.


 

offline mappatazee from ¨y¨z¨| (Burkina Faso) on 2003-12-29 02:21 [#01008480]
Points: 14294 Status: Lurker | Followup to w M w: #01008478



zero is an integer on the real number line


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 02:41 [#01008486]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



This place is for people who have yet to realize the
universal purposelessness of art. Sure, everything is
purposelessless, but art, like music for example, is
especially purposeless.... isn't it?

But it can get worse than being merely harmless purposeless
art. The behaviour of such a community of initially harmless
sharers of their purposeless, though entertaining
(sometimes), art can transform into a strange perversion of
too frequent sharing of too low quality art just to get the
reward of meaningless feedback. Soon, the social bonds are
the focus rather than the art. Soon we find that all we have
in common is the susceptibility to memetic viruses like the
albums of aphex twin or posessers of music creating
software, selecting it as fit for survival in its evil
neverending putrid onslaught of binary replication. I'm
going to bed and when I wake up I plan to be grumpy. We all
have our off days, and I certainly deserve one tomorrow
after all this bamboozled optimism. Or something.


 

offline Erronous from Netherlands, The on 2003-12-29 02:46 [#01008488]
Points: 2519 Status: Lurker | Followup to w M w: #01008486



the number 0 is pretty much non-purpose-less-less

then again, you little philosopher, you shouldn't look at it
that way. It doesn't combine at all.


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 02:50 [#01008491]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker | Followup to mappatazee: #01008479



hmm... that helped me understand even more than the
distinguished raver, dr. math. I tip my hat to you.
Unfortunately my hat was really a big plastic sombrerro
filled with punch and when I tipped it it spilled all over
you. On the positive side, the punch had ice cubes and was
refreshing on this hot day, on the negative side, it's
winter so actually by hot day I mean cold day, on the plus
side you were really thirsty and were able to drink some, on
the negative side the ice cubes knocked out one of your
teeth as they hit you, on the plus side that tooth was one
you needed pulled anyway because it was a baby tooth being
pushed up by the adult tooth, on the negative side you have
a strange condition where you still have baby teeth at your
age, on the plus side... um


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 03:01 [#01008495]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



I am done being the rock star of this topic. Let it be
understood that, on paper, Erronous shall be credited for
creating the initial message thus spawning this topic.
Therefore please direct all further inquiries and comments
toward Erronous, the new topic owner. If, under this new
leadership, Erronous is responsible for putting even half of
the glory into this topic that I put into it, I will be a
very happy Smurf. Thank you, and god-fish bless you fine
citizens of earth.

Sincerely,
poshnu management


 

offline Anus_Presley on 2003-12-29 03:04 [#01008500]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker



you'rre all going to hell. Jesus did not do maths.


 

offline w M w from London (United Kingdom) on 2003-12-29 03:11 [#01008502]
Points: 21452 Status: Lurker



It was a sin to take a picture of jesus and put it in your
avatar. Everyone knows that if you take a picture of any
american indians or any jesus's, you steal their soul by
capturing it on film. Given that ordinary mortals have
immunity to this, it makes one wonder why anyone would want
to be a god or american indian in the first place.


 

offline Refund from Melbourne (Australia) on 2003-12-29 04:21 [#01008545]
Points: 7824 Status: Lurker | Followup to mappatazee: #01008479



don't josh around with your hardcore math here ;\


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2003-12-29 07:10 [#01008708]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to w M w: #01008473



.. a local rave for local people..?


 

offline artemis from Ghent (Belgium) on 2003-12-29 07:18 [#01008714]
Points: 667 Status: Lurker



The easiest way to understand:
a^0=a^{x-x}=a^x/a^x=1.


 

offline dariusgriffin from cool on 2003-12-29 07:26 [#01008725]
Points: 12423 Status: Regular



Aah, limits, exponents.. Memories from last year come back
into my mind.

Could you throw some more logarithms into the mix ?


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2003-12-29 07:28 [#01008727]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to dariusgriffin: #01008725



are you getting a bit... excited.. Fabien..?


 

offline eXXailon from purgatory on 2003-12-29 07:30 [#01008731]
Points: 6745 Status: Lurker



tan(90) = infinite

further than think I utterly stink at mathematics


 

offline JAroen from the pineal gland on 2003-12-29 07:31 [#01008732]
Points: 16065 Status: Regular



e log 3^x = e log 9
3^x = 9
3^x = 3^2
x = 2

or something


 

offline bryce_berny from chronno (Canada) on 2003-12-29 07:40 [#01008737]
Points: 1568 Status: Lurker



I liked dr. math's 5^2/5^2 = 1 = 5^(2-2)



 

offline epohs from )C: on 2003-12-29 08:09 [#01008765]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



log

*snicker*


 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2003-12-29 11:37 [#01008998]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular



don't worry about mathematix. i still don't understand why
it works...and can't EVEN START TO FUCKING COMPREHEND why
people are so pathagoeran in this day in age.

Don't be so fucking egotiztikal! Our weak ass frankensteined
constructs we dub as math is a jallopy of metaphysics. Do we
honestly believe that the whole universe is governed by this
crap?

1+1=1 when 2 rain drops merge...

personally, i dig systems theory :P.

making sence? hmmmm.


 

offline Cheffe1979 from fuck (Austria) on 2003-12-29 11:45 [#01009011]
Points: 4630 Status: Lurker | Followup to nanotech: #01008998



systems theory in the sense of those germans in the
fifties?

or the mathematical one, goedel and such


 

offline uzim on 2003-12-29 12:15 [#01009058]
Points: 17716 Status: Lurker



Erronous, mappatazee > yes, it is comprehensible, but only
in an abstract way - if you see what i mean! you can't do
2^0 by counting apples... =)

(and lots of math is like that)
(i'm definitely not a math-head ^^)


 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2003-12-29 12:19 [#01009063]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular | Followup to Cheffe1979: #01009011



well, it's somewhat based on grodel's works...however, i'm
talking about fritjof capra, and co.


 

offline artemis from Ghent (Belgium) on 2003-12-29 13:00 [#01009102]
Points: 667 Status: Lurker



Oh yes, i like it! I 'm a mathematician and my love for math
is even great as for music.


 

offline nene from United States on 2003-12-29 13:35 [#01009149]
Points: 1475 Status: Lurker



here's another, intuitive way of thinking about it.

2^3 means three 2's multiplied by each other
2^2 means two 2's multiplied by each other
2^1 means one 2 (no multiplication necessary)
2^0 means zero 2's multiplied by each other.

here's something else to think about. if math is a
subdivision of logic, and music is math, does that mean
music is nothing but applied logic? discuss.


 

offline mc_303_beatz from Glasgow, Scotland on 2003-12-29 13:47 [#01009164]
Points: 3386 Status: Regular



e=mc2


 

offline uzim on 2003-12-29 13:57 [#01009180]
Points: 17716 Status: Lurker



i don't agree with "music is math", not everyone composes
with algorithms and electronic and all this stuff - and what
about improvisation??

now, if you want to have a cold, mechanical, soulless vision
of the word, you can say the universe is math, our brains
are like computers, everything is math.... and you may be
right, maybe, but i don't want to believe this anyway.

oh, and fuck boards of canada, too : )


 

offline WooferAttack from Milano (Italy) on 2003-12-30 01:31 [#01009788]
Points: 12920 Status: Lurker



i was a disaster in math at school and i don't like it.

but i like track as polynominal c, music is math,
mathematical equation, etc...


 

offline WooferAttack from Milano (Italy) on 2003-12-30 01:32 [#01009789]
Points: 12920 Status: Lurker



btw: someone between your big mathematical brains solved the
complex mathematical equation created by richie?


 

offline Morton from out (Netherlands, The) on 2003-12-30 04:16 [#01009840]
Points: 10000 Status: Addict



2+2=5


 

offline princo from Shitty City (Geelong) (Australia) on 2003-12-30 04:18 [#01009843]
Points: 13411 Status: Lurker



I won't sleep easy till they crown wMw as a moderator



 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2003-12-30 07:58 [#01010112]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular | Followup to WooferAttack: #01009789



i remember something posted about this a LONG bit ago before
i was even a MB member here. it said how this guy went to
this chem/math chatroom, and posted the formula, someone in
there recognized it as an afx track, and said that it's just
a random equation, w/ no hidden insight.


 


Messageboard index