/sci/ - Science & Math

2$.

Perhaps its just that one type of thought can get you so far, So when Einstein came up with all of his 'cool stuff' his type of thought could only get so far, but someone else learning what Einstein had already done with different type of thought gets further.
This would imply that one doesn't lose creativity with age but only one type of creativity can only get you so far.

over $9000???

Did you intentionally want to distract people from your post by using such an obnoxious image? Enjoy your thread of idiots arguing over an ambiguous question.

$1 plus half it's price.

Here's food for thought:

The molecules in your brain will function the same now as they do in 40 years, they know not of time.

They do not know whether you are 45 or 10.
Keep discovering shit.

>>3067500

$2

$1 + 0.5*2 = $2

>>3067517

>Has anyone really been far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

>>3067500
$1 div 2 = $.5

$1+$.5 = $1.5

>>3067528
Yeah leave me alone it was rushed.
But the point is still understandable, me thinks.

x=1+x/2
x/2=1
x=2

>>3067532

>$1 div 2

the price isn't $1, bro

>>3067532
r-tard alert.

a game costs (1 dollar plus half it's price.)
1 + p/2 = p
1 = p/2
2*1 = p
p = 2

Einstein stopped giving a fuck.

You have more passion when you are younger too.
Obviously because you have the rest of your life to look forward to. When your old everything is shit.

>>3067526
Actually they know.
Brain with age becomes slower, smaller and less creative.

>>3067545
Nope, Eisntein never gave a fuck, till his deathbed he was wondering what was photons and other things.
Many scientists today of old age work but can't achieve anything else.

<span class="math">a=1+\frac{1}{2}a[/spoiler]
<span class="math">a=1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(
1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}(...)))))))))))[/spoiler]
<span class="math">a\approx2[/spoiler]
the cost of the game is $2.

Phd In Math here.

The answer for the pic IS NOT 2$, wake up hiveminds.

It is impossible to tell, because of the inherit verbal structure the sentence has.

Not actually PhD but am in grad school and we've done similar problems to this, which they didn't have a logical answer.

Only fools with half mind think its 2$
Enjoy your lesser intellect.

>>3067565
...

>>3067581
Are you that stupid?

>>3067565
How do you solve it in any other way?

1 + 0.5x = x
1 = 0.5x
2 = x

wait i just got trolled 10/10

>>3067565

You are correct. The sentence does not even make sense:

>A game costs $1 plus half it is price.

>>3067565
>It is impossible to tell, because of the inherit verbal structure the sentence has.
Maybe if you have absolutely no grasp of the English language.

1.50 should be it's price, since the game cost 1$ plus half it's price.
so since the total price is 1.50

the formula is 1+(1.50/2)

>>3067597
probably but all math PhD professors i know agree with me.

>>3067595

Every time you arrive at a price for game you are forced divide that figure and add the result to the price you arrived at. Thus the game cost is infinite. Ironically, it is objectively the worst game ever to have existed in the span of human history it is blessing in and of itself that no one will ever be able to afford it

>>3067602
derp.

it is 2.
the sentence basically breaks down to
1+0.5x=x
l2language /sci/

<span class="math">\bf{You~people~are~mathtarded~as~hell.}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\sum^\infty_{a=1+\frac{1}{2}a} 1+\frac{1}{2}a[/spoiler]
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%5Csum^%5Cinfty_{a%3D1%2B%5Cfrac{1}{2}a}+1%2B%5Cfrac{1}{2}a
<span class="math">\mathbb{END~OF~THREAD.}[/spoiler]
ps OP: TL;DR.

>>3067642
pss <span class="math">a=2[/spoiler]

>>3067642
fullretard.jpg

saying same stupid things with a different way.

Just take this to any actual mathematician and he will say the same thing.

>>3067658

x = 1 + x/2
2x = 2+x
2x^2 = 2x + x^2
2x^2 - 2x = x^2
2(x^2 - x - 2) = x^2 - 2^2
2(x-2)(x+1) = (x-2)(x+2)
2(x+1) = (x+2)
2x + 2 = x + 2
x + 2 = 2
x = 0

It's free.

>>3067658

>>3067694
>2(x-2)(x+1) = (x-2)(x+2)
>2(x+1) = (x+2)
>implying x is not 2

>>3067694

>>3067694

>>3067694

>>3067565
that's what I was thinking but ended up dropping Trig my sophomore year in HS because I had a shitty teacher so I wasn't sure I had any idea what I was talking about.

>>3067562 is somewhat how I visualized it

"Youth is wasted on the young."

>>3067694
I don't even...

>>3067721
"wealth is wasted on the old" -me

>A game costs $1 plus half it's price.
>A game costs $1 plus half it is price.
>A game costs $1 plus half (of $1). It is price
>A game costs $1.50. It is the price.

>>3067729
Sure. Medication is wasted on the old.

>>3067729
>implying wealth would not be wasted on the youth.

lrn2logic.

Guys guys guys guys, am asking about age/creativity.
Ok game is 2$.

But what about age of creativity?

Do you think its:
1.Lesser interest in discovering something?
2.Brain slows down?
3.Both?

I'll go with both.
Many scientists try even harder in their later life to discover new stuff, but only the young can manage that.

How do you feel that you are wasting your life right now?
You could be discovering new shit but instead you do nothing.
And it will be too late after few years.

its a fucking trick question, stop refering to the damn pic. cost and price are synonims.

captchaL 1:18 ernswo

TO ALL:

The question is ambiguous (inb4buzzword).

You could read it as the following:

The game costs 1 dollar, and you need to find half of 1 Dollar to get it's total price.

OR

You could read it as a games costs is equal to 1 Dollar PLUS half of it's price. This is kind of a roundabout way of saying it, and that's the whole point of the image, to confuse people and troll.

TL;DR

It's a fucking trick, and only a troll so don't bother discussing it.

x= 1 + half the price of the game

this is actually not true for REAL geniuses.

da vinci discovered, engineered, painted, and constructed amazing things througout his entire life.

newton discovered and invented amazing shit throughout his entire life.

shakespear wrote amazing shit throughout his entire life.

goethe wrote and discovered amazing shit throughout his whole life.

einstein did one great thing but thats it. hes just not that much of a genius, like the people above were.

>>3067757
You're a damn retard.
The game doesn't cost a dollar and also a dollar and fifty-cents.

The game costs (1 dollar plus half it's actual price)

A game costs $1 plus half its price. Cost is the amount you have to pay which is equal to its price. Since half its price + $1 = Price (cost) the game costs $2. SO WE HAVE:

x/2 + 1 = x
x/2 = x-1
x =2x-2
Only 2 satisfies this equation.

youre still going on about that? the answer is 18.
1+0.5x=1+0.5*34=1+17=18
>obvious

ITT: trolls trolling trolled trolls trolled trolling trolling trolls trolled troll trolling

>>3067757
>Ambiguous
>Buzzword

0/10

>>3067759

da vinci discovered, engineered, painted, and constructed amazing things througout his entire life.
>He didn't discovered much(if any), everything else are not correlated with scientific creativity.

newton discovered and invented amazing shit throughout his entire life.
>Its well known that newton after some point started using other people works and presenting it as his own.
Not much of his own.

shakespear wrote amazing shit throughout his entire life.
>Shakespare not relavent with scientific ingenuity.

goethe wrote and discovered amazing shit throughout his whole life.
>Same, not scientific ingenuity.

I knew about these people and my OP is considering these people in the equation.

There is a reason why writers can write all their life good stuff, why economics can be good too at old ages, painters etc.

But when it comes to scientific discoveries things change DRAMATICALLY.

>>3067642

>>3067528
wtf how can you not make sense of that? This made amazingly good sense to me. They discover all the easy things first in the field they are good at then it takes them longer to discover the more difficult things.

>>3067846

so whats your point? in your op you asked if creativity declines with age, and i think writers and painters need at LEAST as much creativity as a scientist.

but to answer your question, why most scientists make only one great discovery in their lifetime is, because usually there is only one great scientific discovery at best within a generation and there are the ones to discover it.

>>3067862

how can you be good at something that hasn't been discovered before now?

Lots of reasons came to my mind about this. One of them:
They concentrated on one specific problem on a very high level. It is like burned into their brains. They can't change their perspective anymore to concentrate on sg else on the same level.

>99% of scientists ever discovered something was in their 17-30.
Sure is pulling statistics out of your ass ITT.

>>3067500
It costs 1$.

You said so yourself.