/sci/ - Science & Math

LE MASTER TROL XD

Just do 6^5 you get the same answer.

>>5903631
Shitposting is shitposting so fuck off.

>>5903634
wat.

This is a breakthrough is math! Someone call the corrupted media!!

>>5903627
Great idea !
We could be more expeditive : let's just note your 6-5 : 30 so, we save a character.

We're doin't it well :)

>>5903634
are you retarded?

That's ridiculous, OP, then we'd have to memorize what 6-5 was.

>>5903627
Okay, okay, okay. What if you wanted to make it to where we could streamline things that involved multiple of those space saving things. For example, if you had 6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6, it'd be really inefficient. What if, instead, you wrote it as 6_11?

>>5903676
Making progress. Come on guys, share your ideas.

>>5903634

wow

>>5903634
>Shitposting
>saging

>you're face when

>>5903634

please be trolling

Hmm...couldn't you repeat this type of abstraction indefinitely? We could do something like

6-6-6-6-6 -> <span class="math">6 \uparrow 6[/spoiler]
<span class="math">6 \uparrow 6 \uparrow 6 \uparrow 6 \uparrow 6[/spoiler] -> <span class="math">6 (\uparrow)^{2} 6[/spoiler]

and so on

>>5903712
Knuth

I don't understand. Please explain it.

>>5903873
What do you not understand? The OP is written in a very pellucid style.

Why the fuck is everyone so lazy. First its broken text language (or RIGHTING language as you call it) now it is seeping into math? Fuck you forever.

There is a condensed version of addition, its called the Riemann Sum. Can even do excel language; sum(1:6)

>>5903627
you mean 6*5? xD

sage in all fields

How would you define it for numbers other than 6?

>>5904066
>There is a condensed version of addition
This is p neat

>>5903627
6^5 in the additive group Z.

>>5904066
Why is the Riemann sum condensed?

>>5903627

>Case 1
You're a troll, and your post actually made me laugh for it's ambition is unbridled

>Case 2
You post still made me laugh. I din't know your level in math but what you experienced is what I call abstraction descent. When you spend much time in abstract construct you sometimes forget the working mechanism of very obvious basic principles. Happens rarely but still. Actual discussion could happen.

You forgot multiplication.

6+6+6+6+6 = 6-5 (your notation) = 6*5.

I completely forgot the definition of the Basis of a vector space a few months ago while redefining it using awkward math to realize my lapse in thinking.

whoa op just invented multiplication!

except he's a few thousand years late. too bad :(

<div class="math">\sum_{k=1}^{n} 6_k</div>

>>5906477

Wtf is <span class="math">6_k[/spoiler] plz

>>5906508
subscripts are often used to denote members of a sequence, or in this case a series.
the sigma means you add all of the kth 6's together, 1, 2, 3... up to some number n which we can choose.
lo, my notation is supreme!

>>5906477
You don't subscript numbers bro.

>>5906518
i guess we have to stick with the 6-5 notation then

wait I DO WHAT I WANT

>>5903627

>>5906515

So, you choose the kth number 6 from a list of all 6s.

Damn, if you were a programmer, your "hello world" file would be 50 gigs.

6 + 6 + 6+ 6 +6

What if we could invent an algorithm that could calculate the result for an arbitrarily long addition chain faster than O(n)

He would certainly get the Nobel prize.

>>5906543
I think storing all the sixes in a hash table is the first step to achieving this.

>>5903627
In all seriousness this is a great thread. Obviously the operation OP "discovered" is multiplication as I'm sure he knows.

But suppose we only know of natural numbers and the addition of natural numbers. Could we prove that this "new" operator is commutative, associative and distributive? What about inverse numbers? How would one even get the idea of inverse numbers in the first place, if all one knew of was natural numbers?

I think doing this kind of "acting", in which you pretend to know only the natural numbers, and then try to discover the well-known properties of multiplication, the existence and rules of inverse numbers, etc. would be a fun exercise.

>>5903641
>>5903647
>>5903707
>>5903708
>>5903709
Of course it's a troll you dumbasses

>>5903634

you need to stop smoking dope

>>5903627
I don't see how everyone missed this but what if I wanted to remove 5 from 6?
Would that be 6*5?

ITT: 4chan learns how to multiply, but not to write the operation correctly, typical of 4chan originality.

>>5906574

from A to B
inverse
from B to A

>>5906759
ITT: autists don't get OPs thread

To go off of what OP mentioned about saving space, why don't we just right out the answer? No point in just putting down the equation when we know what the answer is.

>>5906574
This should be a trivial exercise to any maths freshman.

first theorem
let 5+5+5+5+5+5=6-5
and 6+6+6+6+6=5-6
assume by the way of contradiction
5+5+5+5+5+5=6+6+6+6+6
therefore
6-5=5-6
which implies
1=-1
which is false, hence:
b-a=/=a-b

>>5906543
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_tree
O(logn) multiplication.

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carry-lookahead_adder
Very fast addition.

I don't know what the fuck you want, but either of those algorithms is your answer. These aren't new problems, so don't be surprised if there's an old solution.

int(2x)

>>5908268
Your theorem is wrong. You did subtraction, not multiplication

>>5908323
There is no difference.

>>5908700
WHAT THE FUCK. YOU ARE HEREBY BANNED FROM MATH.

>>5908313
What does "int" mean? The interior?

>>5909330
Math is not a secret club. You cannot ban anyone from math.

I just realized, what if addition is the same as subtraction, because you're just adding a negative number; and multiplication is the same as division, because you're just multiplying by a fraction

>>5911933
You can ban yourself from mathematics.

>>5912916
How would I do that?

>>5912916
>ban yourself
ban yourself B4U chan yourself

>>5914241
>How would I do that?
with extreme prejudice

>>5914802
What prejudice?

>>5914800
This is some good advice. Thank you.

why the fuck do we need factorials?!
OP is onto something