If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
Peter Irwin wrote:
oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. James the Mathematician |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
On Dec 9, 5:57*pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Peter Irwin wrote: oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. James the Mathematician- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well, I could at least write the appropriate symbols to set up the problem - the numbers that follow might be off a bit. This is the veritable fruits of a late 60's, early 70's trip through the Math Department. I do think that I could perform addition under the old L/s/d system. Not too hard for a fifty year old, despite being American. oly |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
oly wrote:
On Dec 9, 5:47 pm, Peter Irwin wrote: oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Peter. After almost 30 years as a financial auditor of one sort or another, I have come to this conclusion: If a person was capable of doing the math necessary to calculate the compound interest and could understand just how much they would utlimately pay (or at least be obligated for) --- then they would never borrow the money in the first place. Bullroar. Proper information facilitates proper decision-making. After that, it's a matter of calculated risk. If people in history had followed your advice, you and I would still owe fealty to Scandinavian and English monarchs, respectively. James the Vassal |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
On Dec 9, 6:02*pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
oly wrote: On Dec 9, 5:47 pm, Peter Irwin wrote: oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Peter. After almost 30 years as a financial auditor of one sort or another, I have come to this conclusion: If a person was capable of doing the math necessary to calculate the compound interest and could understand just how much they would utlimately pay (or at least be obligated for) --- then they would never borrow the money in the first place. Bullroar. *Proper information facilitates proper decision-making. *After that, it's a matter of calculated risk. *If people in history had followed your advice, you and I would still owe fealty to Scandinavian and English monarchs, respectively. James the Vassal- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Tiger is finding out what it is like to owe fealty to a Swede and mess around. oly |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
oly wrote:
On Dec 9, 5:57 pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: Peter Irwin wrote: oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. James the Mathematician- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well, I could at least write the appropriate symbols to set up the problem - the numbers that follow might be off a bit. This is the veritable fruits of a late 60's, early 70's trip through the Math Department. I do think that I could perform addition under the old L/s/d system. Not too hard for a fifty year old, despite being American. Ability to so calculate is a function of intelligence and education, not nationality. James the LSD Guy |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
On Dec 9, 6:02*pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
oly wrote: On Dec 9, 5:47 pm, Peter Irwin wrote: oly wrote: My maternal great-grandpa, a Scot by the name of Brown, met his first wife at a Greater-Imperial Institute lecture on "The Evils of the Decimal System". Sounds like a good lecture to me. The most obvious evil is that people not only lose their ability to do mixed base compound mental arithmetic, but lose their ability to do any sort of arithmetic at all without calculators. I once read an argument in favour of decimalization and metrification which claimed that people would get better at arithmetic if they had to do less of it. (I think it was by the otherwise mostly sane Isaac Asimov) The argument is absurd. The only way to get good at arithmetic is to do lots of it. Anything which requires you to do more calculations will make you better at them. (I'm not entirely serious) Peter. After almost 30 years as a financial auditor of one sort or another, I have come to this conclusion: If a person was capable of doing the math necessary to calculate the compound interest and could understand just how much they would utlimately pay (or at least be obligated for) --- then they would never borrow the money in the first place. Bullroar. *Proper information facilitates proper decision-making. *After that, it's a matter of calculated risk. *If people in history had followed your advice, you and I would still owe fealty to Scandinavian and English monarchs, respectively. James the Vassal- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The financial arrangements of Our Revolution did not bear close scrutiny, and contributed greatly to the great neck-shaving uncertainties in France which culminated in the years 1789-1815. oly |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
Mr. Jaggers lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. The only way I was ever taught in school was the successive approximation method. This was a shortfall in my education I'm afraid. I should teach myself one of the more sophisticated methods. so for square root of two 1.5 1.4 1.41 1.42 1.415 1.414 x1.5 x1.4 x1.41 x1.42 x1.415 x1.414 -- -- -- -- -- --- 2.25 1.96 1.9881 2.0164 2.00225 1.99396 While I did in fact remember the first four digits, I will say on my honour that I worked out the multiplication with pencil and paper. (I have not checked them and it is possible, but I think unlikely that I have made an error somewhere.) Peter. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
Peter Irwin wrote:
Mr. Jaggers lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. The only way I was ever taught in school was the successive approximation method. This was a shortfall in my education I'm afraid. I should teach myself one of the more sophisticated methods. so for square root of two 1.5 1.4 1.41 1.42 1.415 1.414 x1.5 x1.4 x1.41 x1.42 x1.415 x1.414 -- -- -- -- -- --- 2.25 1.96 1.9881 2.0164 2.00225 1.99396 I missed copying from the paper correctly - 1.999396 Peter. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
On Dec 9, 6:36*pm, Peter Irwin wrote:
Peter Irwin wrote: Mr. Jaggers lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. The only way I was ever taught in school was the successive approximation method. *This was a shortfall in my education I'm afraid. I should teach myself one of the more sophisticated methods. so for square root of two 1.5 * *1.4 * * 1.41 * * 1.42 * * 1.415 * * *1.414 x1.5 * x1.4 * *x1.41 * *x1.42 * *x1.415 * * x1.414 *-- * * -- * * *-- * * * -- * * * -- * * * * --- 2.25 * 1.96 * 1.9881 * *2.0164 * *2.00225 * *1.99396 I missed copying from the paper correctly - 1.999396 Peter.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Whoa. He went to a better school than me. oly |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Reverse design of 2010 Sac
"Peter Irwin" wrote in message ... Peter Irwin wrote: Mr. Jaggers lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: Let's see you calculate square roots the long way. The only way I was ever taught in school was the successive approximation method. This was a shortfall in my education I'm afraid. I should teach myself one of the more sophisticated methods. so for square root of two 1.5 1.4 1.41 1.42 1.415 1.414 x1.5 x1.4 x1.41 x1.42 x1.415 x1.414 -- -- -- -- -- --- 2.25 1.96 1.9881 2.0164 2.00225 1.99396 I missed copying from the paper correctly - 1.999396 Peter. I could never understand how many people, other than captive students, would ever have occasion to know or calculate the square root of two, to the extent that this should be taught in school. I suspect it's probably for the same reason that soldiers have to learn close order drill. You break 'em down with discipline and then reteach 'em the "right" way. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New Cent Reverse in 2010 | Arizona Coin Collector | Coins | 10 | April 20th 09 10:15 PM |
2010: The End of the Cent? | [email protected] | Coins | 31 | December 8th 08 10:53 PM |
Best design for Hawaii quarter is no design. | stonej | Coins | 0 | February 19th 06 02:01 PM |
Vancouver 2010 Olympics | Richard Thouin | General Discussion | 0 | July 16th 03 12:30 AM |