Results

Choice

Votes


Percent

Yes

62

34.1%


No

120

65.9%



I can't reproduce the 3D graph in the ticalc.org logo.

Charlemagne
(Web Page)

No because:
I don't have that calculator
I don't know anything about 3D graphing
What about 3D Graph for the 83+? Can you make it on there? Someone? Anyone?

Reply to this comment

7 June 2003, 00:00 GMT


Re: Can you reproduce the 3D graph in the ticalc.org logo?

Soth
(Web Page)

Not on my 82 strangely.
But it seems to be a 3D sinc() graph.
(sinc(x) = sin(x) / x). I only found this out about one week ago. Such a strange coincidence that the question is asked now...

Reply to this comment

7 June 2003, 00:12 GMT














Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can you reproduce the 3D graph in the ticalc.org logo?

Soth
(Web Page)

Read the first line.
And, if that taxes you too much then skip reading that and read the first post of mine.
And, if you are still, for some unnecessary reason, unable to do that, then I shall say it in very, and I shall emphasise the word <em>very</em>, capital letters.
SINC (X) = ( SIN (X) / X )
see I even added some spaces to make it REALLY CLEAR.
Now have I answered his question?
As to what cosine is, it is about half pi radians ahead of sine.
The equation is, I believe,
apple = sinc [(orange^2 + banana^2)^(e^693147181n)]
where the suffix 'n' means 'nano'.
And, Pie is very tastey and is exactly equal to 9,
and a square Pie is exactly equal to 81.
(
9 = 8.539734233
81 = 72.92706059
10 = 2
bed = calling me
)
(Sorry about the tags earlier but they had to be used)

Reply to this comment

8 June 2003, 01:07 GMT



































Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 1=2=0=infinity

LordScorpo

Actually, theoretically speaking, if you use the old fashioned way of thinking, and declare 1=2, you could prove this by stating that o=1, n=1, and e=2, or any combination of three numbers, when multiplied, equals 2. that would make the statement 1=2, or one=2 correct. Also, the same can be flipped, and said the other way. All you have to do is make sure that the variables you assign for the letters of the phoenetic spelling of the number multiply out to the value on the other side of the equation.
Now, if we think further into the topic, we can theoretically disprove that statements can be false. All we would have to do is break up all the numbers into letters, assign variables to the numbers so that the equation is balanced. Here is an example.
Dog = Cat
Well, if we say the following,
D=t
g=a
o=C
Then the statement Dog = Cat is true and correct. This can also apply to nonmatching variable numbers like the following example.
Cat = Mouse
Well, there are more letters in Mouse than there are in Cat, but by using the following table of values, this can be proven correct.
C=1 M=5
a=20 o=2
t=5 u=1
s=100
e=0.1
These values will prove that Cat does indeed equal Mouse.

Reply to this comment

11 June 2003, 04:35 GMT


1 2 3 4 5 6 7
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
