This is not a PANIC trade. This is a smart trade.

[ebenezer 0]

Actually, it is hard to admit but he is right. I also checked play-by-play info to confirm the data he used. I shouldn't have judged you so easily DOM ALAN, sorry for that. But you know your reputation as a Hedo hater... Anyway, to cover for this, I'll write the equation for you to solve this pool problem:

1/4 + 1/6 - 1/5 = 1/x

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by ebenezer:

Actually, it is hard to admit but he is right. I also checked play-by-play info to confirm the data he used. I shouldn't have judged you so easily DOM ALAN, sorry for that. But you know your reputation as a Hedo hater... Anyway, to cover for this, I'll write the equation for you to solve this pool problem:

1/4 + 1/6 - 1/5 = 1/x

 

ebenezer's equation is correct, but I've always found that, at least when all properties are additive, it's much easier to solve the equation as (a*B)/(a+B), or in a case like the one above, solve the additive portion separately from the remaining question.

 

In other words, to figure out how quickly the 2 inlet pipes would fill it if the outlet pipe were closed, you'd write the equation as (4*6)/(4+6) or 24/10 which is 2.4. You can then plug that into the original equation, so that you have only 1 combined additive value rather than 2 individual ones, giving you:

 

1/2.4 - 1/5 = 1/x which becomes .417 - .2 = 1/x

 

so 1/x = .217 or x = 1/.217 or x = 4.61 hours, or 4 hours, 36 minutes, 36 seconds. Obviously, there was a good deal of rounding off in those numbers.

 

And regarding my being a "Hedo Hater" or having that reputation, or whatever, I'll repeat what I said earlier today: confirmation bias is a funny thing.

[ClubMed 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by ebenezer:

Actually, it is hard to admit but he is right. I also checked play-by-play info to confirm the data he used. I shouldn't have judged you so easily DOM ALAN, sorry for that. But you know your reputation as a Hedo hater... Anyway, to cover for this, I'll write the equation for you to solve this pool problem:

1/4 + 1/6 - 1/5 = 1/x

 

ebenezer's equation is correct, but I've always found that, at least when all properties are additive, it's much easier to solve the equation as (a*B)/(a+B), or in a case like the one above, solve the additive portion separately from the remaining question.

 

In other words, to figure out how quickly the 2 inlet pipes would fill it if the outlet pipe were closed, you'd write the equation as (4*6)/(4+6) or 24/10 which is 2.4. You can then plug that into the original equation, so that you have only 1 combined additive value rather than 2 individual ones, giving you:

 

1/2.4 - 1/5 = 1/x which becomes .417 - .2 = 1/x

 

so 1/x = .217 or x = 1/.217 or x = 4.61 hours, or 4 hours, 36 minutes, 36 seconds. Obviously, there was a good deal of rounding off in those numbers.

 

And regarding my being a "Hedo Hater" or having that reputation, or whatever, I'll repeat what I said earlier today: confirmation bias is a funny thing.

 

Jump Dom, jump.

[iddelen 7]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

Math is awesome:

 

5 points in 4:49 = 1 point per 57.8 seconds.

9 points in 7:11 = 1 point per 47.9 seconds.

 

We blew our lead because anything less than 2 points a minute, or a point every 30 seconds, is reasonably lousy for a professional basketball team, and because our defense was allowing an average of a point every 24 seconds.

 

And since we want to talk about lead changes, we started the quarter up 12. Which means in the 4:49 Hedo was in to start the quarter, we were outscored by 7, or we were outscored by 1.45 points per minute.

 

After Hedo left, we were outscored by 9 over 7:11. That's us being outscored roughly 1.25 points per minute.

 

So yes, I am serious.

 

Numbers count. It is, in fact, one of their primary functions.

 

You can ignore me if you want, but the only alternative reality I'm living in is the one where basic math applies.

 

DOM, the problem I have with your calculation is that you apply your basic math only to a very specific period of the game, which can provide the results you

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by iddelen:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

Math is awesome:

 

5 points in 4:49 = 1 point per 57.8 seconds.

9 points in 7:11 = 1 point per 47.9 seconds.

 

We blew our lead because anything less than 2 points a minute, or a point every 30 seconds, is reasonably lousy for a professional basketball team, and because our defense was allowing an average of a point every 24 seconds.

 

And since we want to talk about lead changes, we started the quarter up 12. Which means in the 4:49 Hedo was in to start the quarter, we were outscored by 7, or we were outscored by 1.45 points per minute.

 

After Hedo left, we were outscored by 9 over 7:11. That's us being outscored roughly 1.25 points per minute.

 

So yes, I am serious.

 

Numbers count. It is, in fact, one of their primary functions.

 

You can ignore me if you want, but the only alternative reality I'm living in is the one where basic math applies.

 

DOM, the problem I have with your calculation is that you apply your basic math only to a very specific period of the game, which can provide the results you

[jackie69 0]

quote:

Originally posted by jackie69:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by iddelen:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

Math is awesome:

 

5 points in 4:49 = 1 point per 57.8 seconds.

9 points in 7:11 = 1 point per 47.9 seconds.

 

We blew our lead because anything less than 2 points a minute, or a point every 30 seconds, is reasonably lousy for a professional basketball team, and because our defense was allowing an average of a point every 24 seconds.

 

And since we want to talk about lead changes, we started the quarter up 12. Which means in the 4:49 Hedo was in to start the quarter, we were outscored by 7, or we were outscored by 1.45 points per minute.

 

After Hedo left, we were outscored by 9 over 7:11. That's us being outscored roughly 1.25 points per minute.

 

So yes, I am serious.

 

Numbers count. It is, in fact, one of their primary functions.

 

You can ignore me if you want, but the only alternative reality I'm living in is the one where basic math applies.

 

DOM, the problem I have with your calculation is that you apply your basic math only to a very specific period of the game, which can provide the results you

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by jackie69:

quote:

Originally posted by jackie69:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by iddelen:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

Math is awesome:

 

5 points in 4:49 = 1 point per 57.8 seconds.

9 points in 7:11 = 1 point per 47.9 seconds.

 

We blew our lead because anything less than 2 points a minute, or a point every 30 seconds, is reasonably lousy for a professional basketball team, and because our defense was allowing an average of a point every 24 seconds.

 

And since we want to talk about lead changes, we started the quarter up 12. Which means in the 4:49 Hedo was in to start the quarter, we were outscored by 7, or we were outscored by 1.45 points per minute.

 

After Hedo left, we were outscored by 9 over 7:11. That's us being outscored roughly 1.25 points per minute.

 

So yes, I am serious.

 

Numbers count. It is, in fact, one of their primary functions.

 

You can ignore me if you want, but the only alternative reality I'm living in is the one where basic math applies.

 

DOM, the problem I have with your calculation is that you apply your basic math only to a very specific period of the game, which can provide the results you

[ebenezer 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by ebenezer:

Actually, it is hard to admit but he is right. I also checked play-by-play info to confirm the data he used. I shouldn't have judged you so easily DOM ALAN, sorry for that. But you know your reputation as a Hedo hater... Anyway, to cover for this, I'll write the equation for you to solve this pool problem:

1/4 + 1/6 - 1/5 = 1/x

 

ebenezer's equation is correct, but I've always found that, at least when all properties are additive, it's much easier to solve the equation as (a*B)/(a+B), or in a case like the one above, solve the additive portion separately from the remaining question.

 

In other words, to figure out how quickly the 2 inlet pipes would fill it if the outlet pipe were closed, you'd write the equation as (4*6)/(4+6) or 24/10 which is 2.4. You can then plug that into the original equation, so that you have only 1 combined additive value rather than 2 individual ones, giving you:

 

1/2.4 - 1/5 = 1/x which becomes .417 - .2 = 1/x

 

so 1/x = .217 or x = 1/.217 or x = 4.61 hours, or 4 hours, 36 minutes, 36 seconds. Obviously, there was a good deal of rounding off in those numbers.

 

And regarding my being a "Hedo Hater" or having that reputation, or whatever, I'll repeat what I said earlier today: confirmation bias is a funny thing.

 

Hmm, very interesting...It is much easier? I think it is the same thing but whatever you say. Basic "primary school" math:

(15+10-12)/60=1/x x=60/13

Probably it has something to do with you ego but I don't want to carve.

[I love my PTSD. 92]

I think we should trade Hedo for Euclid.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

quote:

Originally posted by ebenezer:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by ebenezer:

Actually, it is hard to admit but he is right. I also checked play-by-play info to confirm the data he used. I shouldn't have judged you so easily DOM ALAN, sorry for that. But you know your reputation as a Hedo hater... Anyway, to cover for this, I'll write the equation for you to solve this pool problem:

1/4 + 1/6 - 1/5 = 1/x

 

ebenezer's equation is correct, but I've always found that, at least when all properties are additive, it's much easier to solve the equation as (a*B)/(a+B), or in a case like the one above, solve the additive portion separately from the remaining question.

 

In other words, to figure out how quickly the 2 inlet pipes would fill it if the outlet pipe were closed, you'd write the equation as (4*6)/(4+6) or 24/10 which is 2.4. You can then plug that into the original equation, so that you have only 1 combined additive value rather than 2 individual ones, giving you:

 

1/2.4 - 1/5 = 1/x which becomes .417 - .2 = 1/x

 

so 1/x = .217 or x = 1/.217 or x = 4.61 hours, or 4 hours, 36 minutes, 36 seconds. Obviously, there was a good deal of rounding off in those numbers.

 

And regarding my being a "Hedo Hater" or having that reputation, or whatever, I'll repeat what I said earlier today: confirmation bias is a funny thing.

 

Hmm, very interesting...It is much easier? I think it is the same thing but whatever you say. Basic "primary school" math:

(15+10-12)/60=1/x x=60/13

Probably it has something to do with you ego but I don't want to carve.

 

I said I found it easier, primarily because the equation I provided doesn't require finding a LCD for any numbers, much less 3 of them. Admittedly, the three numbers in question are a bad example for this, since coming up with a LCD for 4, 5 and 6 is very easy, but if the numbers had been 4.2, 5.7 and 6.1, it's substantially more difficult.

 

But no, I'm certainly not saying it's distinctly "better" in any non-subjective way. I just find it easier for me, personally. No ego involved.

[iddelen 7]

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

quote:

Originally posted by iddelen:

quote:

Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:

Math is awesome:

 

5 points in 4:49 = 1 point per 57.8 seconds.

9 points in 7:11 = 1 point per 47.9 seconds.

 

We blew our lead because anything less than 2 points a minute, or a point every 30 seconds, is reasonably lousy for a professional basketball team, and because our defense was allowing an average of a point every 24 seconds.

 

And since we want to talk about lead changes, we started the quarter up 12. Which means in the 4:49 Hedo was in to start the quarter, we were outscored by 7, or we were outscored by 1.45 points per minute.

 

After Hedo left, we were outscored by 9 over 7:11. That's us being outscored roughly 1.25 points per minute.

 

So yes, I am serious.

 

Numbers count. It is, in fact, one of their primary functions.

 

You can ignore me if you want, but the only alternative reality I'm living in is the one where basic math applies.

 

DOM, the problem I have with your calculation is that you apply your basic math only to a very specific period of the game, which can provide the results you

[ebenezer 0]

I thought we were talking about the 4,5,6 example. Why did you bring decimal numbers into stage? In that case of course I or nobody would or should try to find a LCD.

But for the problem mentioned here, without a calculator, this should be the easiest (but I admit that there is no big differences in difficulty level way for any person to solve THIS problem:

(15+10-12)/60=1/x x=60/13 (You only do one division where outcome is a decimal number)

With calculator, it doesn't matter much but I'd also prefer (15+10-12)/60=1/x and x=60/13 over all these:

 

you'd write the equation as (4*6)/(4+6) or 24/10 which is 2.4. You can then plug that into the original equation,

so that you have only 1 combined additive value rather than 2 individual ones, giving you:

 

1/2.4 - 1/5 = 1/x which becomes .417 - .2 = 1/x

 

so 1/x = .217 or x = 1/.217 or x = 4.61 hours

 

Also this below equation is more meaningful than the multiplied and added one (a*B)/(a+B) because it also shows the reasoning: the relationship bw amount and time more clearly; which is the most important thing for a learner.

1/a + 1/b = 1/x

 

What I want to say is, sorry but I find your first message written in order to "oppose" for the sake of opposing (involving ego and/or illogicality). You tried to cover for it in your second one but not good enough.

 

Ex:

is correct BUT I've always found that

it's MUCH easier

 

And this is last message I wrote into this discussion by the way. It's starting to get ridiculous.