jordan

Google didn't help a whole lot, but I'm going to venture a guess and say that unless you can find a way to levatate the metal off you body so there's no contact, than it wont work.

I'm still relatively unsure, but I'll take everyone's words for it. I'll probably just have a quick chat with the Calc teacher about it when school starts.

Phi's really good at this J'dona makes all of them rhyme YT's lymerics

I heard one of their songs on the radio tonight. Unfortunatlely, it sounded just like the one before it and the one after it. Nothing to impressive. [edit]Linkin Park that is.

You said something about you not being able to prove it yet, plus something about Einstein and you came out with the conclusion that Cap'n is right. I didn't follow the logical progression.

Keyboard shift would be typing everything one key to the left, right, or whatever you want to make it. The word "the" would be "yjr" if you shift right one.

I don't follow.

Could this be solved with the talk I've heard recently about the greater and lesser degrees of infinity?

I do understand the concept of infinity and why certain functions tend to infinity. What I'm still not understanding is this: How can you call the solution infinity when you had to put a number greater than it into the function? Doesn't that mean the solution isn't infinity anymore but rather that the input is infinity? I understand exactly what you're saying, pulkit. What I'm looking for is more of a reason than an explanation. I understand why they say this function tends to infinity but haven't gotten an explanation of why I should believe. Does that make sense?

Maybe I'm thinking of something else, but I thought that the stuff Cap'n was talking about was a little different. My understanding was that the particles will start off the with two related properties. When we decide to measure one, we can instantly determine the state of the other, even if it's lightyears away. Through this method, you have learned the state of a particles that is lightyears away in an instant. Like I said, though, this could be something different than what you're talking about Cap'n.

Let's say I believe numbers only go up to 5. You say no because 5+1=6. You have proven there is a number greater than five. Now, let's say we want to find the biggest number possible, and we'll call that concept infinity. Now, if I tell you than in order to find that biggest number (called infinity) you need to use a bigger one, you'd be confused. That's about where I stand. How can we say the function tends to the greatest possible number when you always have to use a number that is bigger to get there?

Yes, but it's difficult to comprehend that. In order to make the function approach [math]\infty[/math] you need to have a number bigger than [math]\infty[/math], thus negating the initial infinity. Perhaps some other notation should be used then. Then again, mathmeticians have been getting along fine without my help for years.

I am aware that the you stated the correct range at the end there. I didn't simply because the topic did involve the low end of the range. I only wanted to discuss [math]\infty[/math]. As for the first part, I was also aware that [math]\sqrt{\infty-1}[/math] isn't a real funtion. I only intended to point out that it is more accurate than [math]\infty[/math] by inteself. By saying the function tends to infinity negates the fact that when y tends to [math]\infty[/math], x tends to an even greater [math]\infty[/math]. Therefore, would it be more accurate to give [math]\sqrt{\infty-1}[/math] as the upper bound?

That's the site I was looking for. Ok then, it should look like this: I was doing some summer calc work and was asked to find the range of the function [math]\sqrt{x-1}[/math]. The book said the answer was [math]\infty[/math] but I thought that an argument could be made for [math]\sqrt{\infty-1}[/math]. Am I missing something or is this worth getting into?

I was doing some summer calc work and was asked to find the range of the function sqr{x-1}. The book said the answer was infinity but I thought that an argument could be made for sqr{inf-1}. Am I missing something or is this worth getting into? Can't find the LaTeX symbols for sqr and inf either.

Wow. I don't remember that at all.

What was the plot twist in Signs?

So let's say I was willing to listen to a song of theirs to give it fair judgement. What song best exhibits the above?

Can't say I've ever listened to Linkin Park or ever cared to. Just like bloodhound said, it seemed, from the little bits I have heard, to be the music where the goal is to be as loud as a possible and top it off with a bunch of screaming.

Whether they lable themselves Christian or not has very little to do with chord progressions, harmonies etc. That said, if you ignore the lyrics, some of it can tend to be alright.

And we all make fun of me. Oh well. There was much controversy over this earlier. I got myself all confused. Glad it's resolved.

So the answer is 14, correct?

So what does dave's post mean? And why does my calc book say this:

This is really bothering me now. What is the answer here?

Just having to listen to the guy and know that I couldn't go punch him made it frustrating. Don't worry, though, I found it funny and listened through it. I just wish I could've been one of the callers or something. Really, the guy didn't make any sense (I wax my car, just like they do on the steath-bomber so the cops don't know how fast I'm going.) [edit]Whoops. I didn't mean for it to sound like I was offended or anything before. It's just people like that make me remember why I stay in school.