IF:
G = 5
M = 6
m = 6
R = 5
r = ?
n = 6
v = 3
:
(G*M*m)/((r-R)^2))-G*M*n)/R^2 = (m*v^2)/r-R
r = 0.405218595
Unless I'm doing it wrong.
Printable View
IF:
G = 5
M = 6
m = 6
R = 5
r = ?
n = 6
v = 3
:
(G*M*m)/((r-R)^2))-G*M*n)/R^2 = (m*v^2)/r-R
r = 0.405218595
Unless I'm doing it wrong.
wtf
Anyway that exponential equation only has one solution.
You're doing it wrong. I said to get big R as a function of all the constants. I didn't say you could just arbitrarily throw in numbers willy nilly.Quote:
Originally Posted by xXSomeGuyXx
It's got 2. One at 0 and another greater than 0.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
OH! Okay. That makes sense nao. Shit...
You're right, it does have a solution just under 5, and I've got no fucking idea how to get rid of the fucking lns and I feel very inadequate right now.
Lol.
I think in general xe^x=1 might be impossible to solve properly?
It can be done by iteration... but not precisely?
I'm stuck on
For example, not real problem:
4=[44456.55^x]x
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
These are both the same basic equation. And yes, x can't be solved for explicitly. And R can't be solved for explicitly in the other example. I chose those examples to prove that not all equations can be solved :)Quote:
Originally Posted by xXSomeGuyXx
So, they are impossible?
Grr... I just felt as if everything I'd ever learnt was falling from under my feet. :(
Does this mean the roots are transcendental? Well, considering the expression contains e I suppose it'd be hard for them not to be; but would it still be the case if the equation contained 2^x?
I sucked my brain juice dryon those two!!! GRRR I agree with Xei.
Not to worry, the roots can be expressed as convergent series. And yes, any base other than 1, (-1,) or 0 gives roots that can't be expressed in closed form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Aha, that density proof proves it. There is no number between the two so they are not distinct reals. </thread>
So yes, I will concede that 0.9999... = 1
But I still do not agree with the algebra method of proving it. Especially the one that uses 0.33333.... The other one is up in the air but I don't really care.
And yes, Xei, I am a math student. First year majoring in comp. sci. at waterloo. But I HATE pure math =/
0.999~ == 1
but
0.999~ !== 1
I think that satisfies all sides, no? :D
var ag = "Agree"
function lol(){
if(world.explode==false){
xXSomeGuyXx.agree();
}
else if(world.explode==true){
world.explode();
print("WOW");
}
}
lol()
xXSomeGuyXx = ag.Ynot
Grod+9=Whales
Ynot/Me=Grod
You're entitled to think what you want. Just don't expect to be correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by arby
IMO !== is just stupid, PHP should've stuck with !=Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
what it boils down to is
does having the same value make something Equal?
(that's equal with a big E)
Well = is an assigning operator, == is a comparing operator. I think !== makes more sense, don't you?
3 != 4
(not equal in value)
3 == 3.0
(equal in value only)
3 !== 3.0
(equal in value, but not in context)
3.0 === 3.0
(equal in value, and equal in context)
*edit*
is having the same value the only thing that makes numbers Equal?
That actually is quite awesome, I retract my previous statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
That's programming for ya'.
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
awesome
Oww my head...
Hmm... I'll ask my pre-calc teacher on Monday.
And out of curiosity, when was the last time someone on DV admitted they were wrong?
Me, couple ofhours ago.