well, I can divide 3 by any integers, (although by the defintion of base,
not < 3, since we all love definitions, don't we?) and that number sums to 1/3. The fraction 1/3. For any base - the fraction 1/3 of that base. Period.
I'm already getting tired explaining on this.
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
10 11 12
And I say my number system is base 13. Then it will not work.
But if I re-represent 10 as 1+0 = 1, 11 as 1+1 =2, and 12 as 3, and so on,
it works.
EG, is this a numerology trick/question?
I agree.
To answer this question from the beginning:
The reason why 1/3 *3 = 1 where 0.333 (repeating) *3 is not:
is because 1/3 is perfectly rational (or simply as an elementary school kid would call it a fraction) while 0.33(repeating) is not.
0.33(repeating) = 1/3 is iff...
TenaliRaman
If 3^x = 5*(2^y) + 1 , for some integers x and y is true,
I had approached the same manner you did. But I got stuck at the 3rd transition. Can you explain how you pull 80 out? And please verify what I did here...
1st Transition:
I had obtained the Binomial Tree/expansion by...
Hi. I am trying to understand what is this problem --
Is it right for me to state the problem as follows?
3^x = 5*(2^y) + 1 , for some integers x and y.
Thanks.
Which is the reason I think the decimal point system, even if it has been worked on for centuries old, as Integral put it, which case I don't really give a toss, is pretty darn useless and only creates fallacies of its own.
Just as how you point it's impossible for me to do so by...
Who says it's impossible? Tell me what do you get when you multiply 9 with 9. You get 81, don't you?. The last, of the last of the last place is the number 1, isn't it? Isn't that different from 9? So isn't the boundary the number 1?
the issue here is, how are you going to write the...
There is difference between symmetric and equivalence. In the above, seems equivalence, if talking about sets, and not equations.
there no sets involved (as yet). And neither even is symmetry.
Its meant a statement which goes forward, but not backwards. That's all. (Maybe it could be the...
:smile:
Please don't pour your emotions on ME, dearest sir.
Please don't ask me further more: like what is the place of value of '1' in my above lines. If you wish the answer, you can consult the calculator. If you think this a fabrication, then the calculator had done it.
And...
Cosmo16, you're proof actually reinstate the point that 1/3 is 0.333... but not the other way.
If you work backwards, (eg. starting from x = 1), I believe the logic, the first premise will already make it impossible to reach the conclusion that x = 0.333... (or .999...).
But if work...
Hi. If you don't mind, I like to share my opinion on this.
This type of thing is new, as before the decimal system was invented, there was not such a problem. This is a problem with the decimal system and not a problem with fractions, as in ancient times, I guess.
As an illustration: 3...