|
|
 Up |
  |
Author: ExibarExibar
Date: Jul 1, 2008 23:42
got a question for y'all....
I just watched the movie "21" about the MIT BlackJack card counting
team. In the movie there was a classroom setting where the professor
had 3 doors, like on let's make a deal.
The student was asked to choose a door, he chose door number 1. He
clearly had a 33%% chance of getting the correct door.
The professor then opened door number 3, and it was not the
student's door.
The professor asked the student if he wanted to switch doors now,
the student said yes, and chose dor #2. It turned out to be the
correct door.
They went on to explain that because there were 3 doors in the
beginning, the odds were 33%% to get the correct door. Once a non-
winning door was revealed, they said that the odds are now 66%% that
the other door, the one not chosed by the student, was the correct
door.
I say that the odds changed at the point the the non-winning door
was revealed, and it then became 50-50 on choosing the correct door
because the number of choices had changed.
|
| Show full article (1.13Kb) |
|
9 Comments |
|
|
Author: MaurizioMaurizio
Date: Jul 1, 2008 23:14
I'm try to transform a very simple function using Fundamental
Transformation Theorem.
Fundamental Transformation Theorem:
http://web2.clarkson.edu/projects/fluidflow/courses/me529/downloads/18_Transform...
Page 2
My function is:
X=-abs((1/4)*x)+1/2 -2=
my g(X) = (1/3) * X
I draw the graph and I osserve that y tranform x in the interval
-2/3 <= y <= 2/3
So start considering my function tranformation:
In the interval form -2/3 <= y <= 2/3, I found one solution for
equation y=g(x)
my solution is x = 3 * y
So I apply my theorem
g'(x) = 1/3
f(y) = (-abs((1/4)*(3)*y)+1/2)/(1/3)
|
| Show full article (0.81Kb) |
|
5 Comments |
|
|
Author: symphonysymphony
Date: Jul 1, 2008 22:27
If a scientist has an aversion to mystery
could he write a definitive version of scientific history ?
But if an atom is in it's ground state
it can on longer radiate.
www.intelrap.com
|
| |
|
4 Comments |
|
|
Author: Steve SchwartzSteve Schwartz
Date: Jul 1, 2008 20:21
I have a problem where I have to do a large number of tasks and I want
to do them with all combinations of 2 in a row.
The easiest and dumbest way takes 2n^2 tasks using the algorithm:
for (i=0; i
for (j=0; j
run_task(i);
run_task(j);
report_results(i, j);
}
}
The run_task and report_results procedures save some state info and
report if something interesting happened.
I can see an n^2+1 solution that's a little more complicated. But I
can't prove it's correct or the minimum but it works nicely for small n.
for (i=0; i
current_task=0;
|
| Show full article (1.48Kb) |
|
3 Comments |
|
|
Author: StevenSteven
Date: Jul 1, 2008 18:17
Hi,
If we let a (a means alpha) be small then if we end up in the one of the tails (assume a 2 tail test) then we feel comfortable rejecting the null hypothesis. This is all fine for me.
Now suppose we let a be very close to, but below, 1/2. Now if we end up in the middle, ie not the tails, I want to say that we can feel good about accepting the null hypothesis.
My professor felt that this was a silly. Was he correct?
|
| |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
Author:
Date: Jul 1, 2008 16:32
FWIW, this is out today (1st July 2008).
: "The Abyss of Time: An architect's history of the Golden Section"
: Martin Hutchinson, ISBN 0955706815
It's a previously-unpublished monograph from 1973.
One of the themes of the book is that there may have been a
prehistoric system of weights and measures based on the Megalithic
Foot and the Fibonacci Series. The Fibonacci Series has the advantage
of being a useful way of rapidly building up a series of larger
distances from a given initial reference-distance, so if a medieval
architect specified that a cathedral floorplan should be 34 feet by 55
feet, the guys on the ground would have no problem marking up those
distances and integer proportions very accurately.
We'd then tend to look at the resulting building with
Twentieth-Century eyes and say: "Wow! They used the Golden Ratio!" ,
whereas the real reason for the building showing an approximation of
"phi" might have been rather more mundane.
|
| Show full article (1.44Kb) |
|
6 Comments |
|
|
Author: Irving DrinkwineIrving Drinkwine
Date: Jul 1, 2008 14:15
What is the minimum number of points ( a point being BOTH a location
and distance from ME) must I know to be able to plot where I am on a 2
dimensional grid? Is it 2?
And I'd need to know 3 , to know my location in 3 dimensions?
What if I know 1 point, and the distance I am for a 2nd point, but not
the 2nd points location. That would be of no help, right?
Where could I look up more information on this, any suggestions?
Thanks
BP
|
| |
|
10 Comments |
|
|
Author: sanchopancho80sanchopancho80
Date: Jul 1, 2008 13:08
Hello,
is it true that we can find a constant c>0 such that for every natural
numbers a, b and k and every function f:
-->N with f(n)>=log (n) holds
c^f(n) >= a*(n+2)*f(n)^k*b^(f(n)*k) ?
Thanks,
S.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Harun Al-RashidHarun Al-Rashid
Date: Jul 1, 2008 12:38
Hello !
Is it true that integral(0 to 1) integral(0 to 1) floor(x/y)*floor(y/x) dx dy = 0 ?
TIA
|
| |
|
11 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
