View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
atatmeAtatame Who? Joined: 17 Feb 2009 Location: Bozeman, Montana, United States
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:36 pm Post subject: For all you math nerds out there |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
DracoSailor Joined: 30 Oct 2011
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
It's less surprising that someone did this when you realize one feature about it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Messy RecipeEl Gran CapitánJoined: 13 Mar 2005 Location: Inter Veritates
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Draco wrote: | It's less surprising that someone did this when you realize one feature about it. |
Thanks, wouldn't have seen that bit if I hadn't gone back over it to look... totally not surprising at all in context. _________________
ABC News wrote: | Birds can disable planes, Ostrom said, by flying into the engines and shutting them down. |
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Erwin RommelElite Joined: 02 Aug 2005
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Err, I really think (first) the caption is wrong. Like way wrong.
It's .002 + e^(i*pi) + sum of 1/2^n
e^(i*pi)=-1, so it's just .002 after you add it up. I think Randall Munroe was probably pissed he owed verizon such a small amount or some such.
Also ... it's "pi", not "pie"
I'm certain it's e^(i*pi) since that actually shows up in math, whereas e^(2*pi) does not.
****
Edit: It's a joke about this:
http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html _________________ -=|CT|=-Descartes
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Berry PunchPony HATER Joined: 04 Sep 2011
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Erwin Rommel wrote: | Err, I really think (first) the caption is wrong. Like way wrong.
It's .002 + e^(i*pi) + sum of 1/2^n
e^(i*pi)=-1, so it's just .002 after you add it up. I think Randall Munroe was probably pissed he owed verizon such a small amount or some such.
Also ... it's "pi", not "pie"
I'm certain it's e^(i*pi) since that actually shows up in math, whereas e^(2*pi) does not.
****
Edit: It's a joke about this:
http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html |
God damn numbers, how do they work?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ChronicSailor Joined: 26 Dec 2008
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
erwin you need some fresh air
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Stealth▲RAWR TRIANGLE RAWR▲ Joined: 13 Mar 2005
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Ugh... I'm going to have to post this. _________________ Motherfucking Triangles! Being all three sided n' shit, who do they think they are?!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Erwin RommelElite Joined: 02 Aug 2005
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Chronic wrote: | erwin you need some fresh air |
I get fresh air during the walk to campus every day. _________________ -=|CT|=-Descartes
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
fight_the_powerDeckswab Joined: 02 Mar 2010
|
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Erwin Rommel wrote: | Err, I really think (first) the caption is wrong. Like way wrong.
It's .002 + e^(i*pi) + sum of 1/2^n
e^(i*pi)=-1, so it's just .002 after you add it up. I think Randall Munroe was probably pissed he owed verizon such a small amount or some such.
Also ... it's "pi", not "pie"
I'm certain it's e^(i*pi) since that actually shows up in math, whereas e^(2*pi) does not.
****
Edit: It's a joke about this:
http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html |
Hard to tell from the picture if it's a sloppy 2, or a sloppy i. Math checks out of it's a sloppy 2. I'm certainly in agreement that you wouldn't see e^2pi nearly as often when doing math, but the math is correct when that's used. I assume that's the reason for the 0.002 - he wanted to incorporate e and pi somehow, and e^2pi was pretty damn close to the number he wanted. _________________ fight_the_power
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
InsomniacSailor Joined: 03 Jan 2012 Location: Not the US.
|
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Erwin RommelElite Joined: 02 Aug 2005
|
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
fight_the_power wrote: | Erwin Rommel wrote: | Err, I really think (first) the caption is wrong. Like way wrong.
It's .002 + e^(i*pi) + sum of 1/2^n
e^(i*pi)=-1, so it's just .002 after you add it up. I think Randall Munroe was probably pissed he owed verizon such a small amount or some such.
Also ... it's "pi", not "pie"
I'm certain it's e^(i*pi) since that actually shows up in math, whereas e^(2*pi) does not.
****
Edit: It's a joke about this:
http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html |
Hard to tell from the picture if it's a sloppy 2, or a sloppy i. Math checks out of it's a sloppy 2. I'm certainly in agreement that you wouldn't see e^2pi nearly as often when doing math, but the math is correct when that's used. I assume that's the reason for the 0.002 - he wanted to incorporate e and pi somehow, and e^2pi was pretty damn close to the number he wanted. |
Check the link out at the bottom of my post. It's almost certainly an i. _________________ -=|CT|=-Descartes
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
fight_the_powerDeckswab Joined: 02 Mar 2010
|
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Erwin Rommel wrote: | fight_the_power wrote: | Erwin Rommel wrote: | Err, I really think (first) the caption is wrong. Like way wrong.
It's .002 + e^(i*pi) + sum of 1/2^n
e^(i*pi)=-1, so it's just .002 after you add it up. I think Randall Munroe was probably pissed he owed verizon such a small amount or some such.
Also ... it's "pi", not "pie"
I'm certain it's e^(i*pi) since that actually shows up in math, whereas e^(2*pi) does not.
****
Edit: It's a joke about this:
http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html |
Hard to tell from the picture if it's a sloppy 2, or a sloppy i. Math checks out of it's a sloppy 2. I'm certainly in agreement that you wouldn't see e^2pi nearly as often when doing math, but the math is correct when that's used. I assume that's the reason for the 0.002 - he wanted to incorporate e and pi somehow, and e^2pi was pretty damn close to the number he wanted. |
Check the link out at the bottom of my post. It's almost certainly an i. |
Yeah. I guess if there is some significance to 0.002 in regards to verizon, that's probably what it is. I guess that's the joke. The math in the caption isn't incorrect, though, except for mistaking the i with the 2. _________________ fight_the_power
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
BarytaQCommodore Joined: 20 Oct 2011
|
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
There's a YouTube vid about it somewhere I think. Verizon said that cellular usage was .02 cents a kb, but they later said it was .02 dollars. The guy called in and the person he talked to said that .02 cents = .02 dollars. He talked to the manager who said the exact same thing. _________________ http://tf2b.com/profiles/76561197988317087
My pitiful backpack...
I'll still blow your ass up.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
tru.pairadocsBackstabbing Turd-nugget Spymaster Joined: 12 Oct 2011 Location: Michigan
|
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
BarytaQ wrote: | There's a YouTube vid about it somewhere I think. Verizon said that cellular usage was .02 cents a kb, but they later said it was .02 dollars. The guy called in and the person he talked to said that .02 cents = .02 dollars. He talked to the manager who said the exact same thing. |
Erwin Rommel wrote: | http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2007/08/original-recording-of-verizon-customer.html |
_________________
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|