Galactic Matyhematics.

@Quehoniaomath,

(3x+4) / (6x+7) = (x+1) / (2x+3)

two restrictions
x<>-7/6 & x<>-3/2

(3x+4) (2x+3) = (x+1)(6x+7)

6x^2+17x+12=6x^2+13x+7

4x=-5

x=-5/4

Not real hard using Arabic Algebra

Rap

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Here is another one, can someone do it the conventional way?

Quote:
(3x+4) / (6x+7) = (x+1) / (2x+3)

Of course this is a terrible test since both numerators can be set to zero making the denominator meaningless. I'm sure you didn't pick such a special case on purpose. Let's change the problem so that that rare condition isn't present. How about you solve:

(3x+4) / (6x+7) = (3x+1) / (2x+3)

P.S. Still waiting for you to solve 1/17.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

Of course this is a terrible test since both numerators can be set to zero making the denominator meaningless. I'm sure you didn't pick such a special case on purpose. Let's change the problem so that that rare condition isn't present. How about you solve:

(3x+4) / (6x+7) = (3x+1) / (2x+3)

well, solve it, it can be done.

I will come back at 1/17 ok?

0 Replies

@raprap,

Quote:

(3x+4) / (6x+7) = (x+1) / (2x+3)

two restrictions
x<>-7/6 & x<>-3/2

(3x+4) (2x+3) = (x+1)(6x+7)

6x^2+17x+12=6x^2+13x+7

4x=-5

x=-5/4

Not real hard using Arabic Algebra

Rap

ok, Thanks, hadn't seen this one.
However it can be done in a few seconds with Vedic Mathematics!
The above is til clumsy and error prone.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

It wasn't too difficult--and it only took me a few seconds using simple algebra.

Probably less time than it took to correctly spell 'mathematics'

Rap

3 Replies

@raprap,

Vedic math seems to be a bunch of tricks that don't really help one understand the various relationships in math analyses. (Especially expansions and things like Fourier transforms)> Id looked over FFT's in "Vedic Math for Dummies"
and its waay more complicated than it need be.

I till hve that chalk on a blckbord feel whenever somebody posts "Maths"

0 Replies

@raprap,

Vedic math seems to be a bunch of tricks that don't really help one understand the various relationships in math analyses. (Especially expansions and things like Fourier transforms)> I looked over FFT's in "Vedic Math for Dummies"
and its waay more complicated than it need be.

I still get that chalk on a blackboard feel whenever somebody posts "Maths"

0 Replies

@raprap,

Quote:

It wasn't too difficult--and it only took me a few seconds using simple algebra.

Probably less time than it took to correctly spell 'mathematics'

Rap

Yes, true but it can be done even much faster by Vedic Math.
Compared to Vedic math it is slow and very errorprone.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Yes, true but it can be done even much faster by Vedic Math.
Compared to Vedic math it is slow and very errorprone.

And yet with this extremely fast tool, you still haven't shown how to divide one into seventeen or solve slight modifications to your special case problems. It seems if vm was as useful as you say, you could have answered those questions faster than the time it takes to post that you will get to them later.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

And yet with this extremely fast tool, you still haven't shown how to divide one into seventeen or solve slight modifications to your special case problems. It seems if vm was as useful as you say, you could have answered those questions faster than the time it takes to post that you will get to them later.

You are just assuming a lot here.

ever worked with Vedic Mathematics yourself?

and yes, VM is extremely fast. as said, it is even used in the field of Information Technology to speed up things! So it really works and is faster. yes.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

And yet once again, no answer to 1/17.

Have I used interesting math tricks? Yes. My father showed me how to square numbers ending in 5 and multiply by 11 (both from your first post) decades ago. They are interesting oddities with very limited use, but fun to play with. The rule of 72 is also a great one, especially if you are dealing with interest rates. That you propose that these special situations have general use is clearly ridiculous and your carefully chosen problems demonstrate the point. That your "extremely fast tool" cannot deviate even slightly from your suggested problems show how limited it is. Sure you can do 1/19, but 1/17 completely stumps you. You have wasted more time telling us that you are going to get around to doing 1/17 than it would have taken for a 9 year old to do it by hand.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

Have I used interesting math tricks? Yes. My father showed me how to square numbers ending in 5 and multiply by 11 (both from your first post) decades ago. They are interesting oddities with very limited use, but fun to play with. The rule of 72 is also a great one, especially if you are dealing with interest rates. That you propose that these special situations have general use is clearly ridiculous and your carefully chosen problems demonstrate the point. That your "extremely fast tool" cannot deviate even slightly from your suggested problems show how limited it is. Sure you can do 1/19, but 1/17 completely stumps you. You have wasted more time telling us that you are going to get around to doing 1/17 than it would have taken for a 9 year old to do it by hand.

Oh I can do 1/17 very easily but it is shown here before. Haven't you read it?
It IS extremely simple with VM as are a lot of other things.
And your logic is flawed. If I don't calculate 1/17 if your ask that doesn't mean it can't be done of course. There might ne other reasons for me
not doing it immediately when you aks. I hope you understand.
But in reality, I think you are threatened by this new form of mathematics.
Children who uses this are not blocked by the extremely stupid way of conventional mathematics. They love it and get creative with math. And they don't get math phobia. It really is a superior system.

Once you start using VM. And you really have to use it to understand how
good and fast it is, you see how clumsy, stupid, awkard and errorprone the conventional way of doing math is.

Well, your posting does just show you have no idea what Vedic Mathematics is.

You have indeed no clue at all! And as I said it is even used in the field of Information Technology.
And it is not onlu used for simple sums. Here I scratch just the surface,

Just try using it. But I don't think you are going to. You seem to be blocked by the very stupid conventioal mathematics.
It can even used for calculus , e.q differential equations.and a lot of other things.

And limited use?? I really had a laugh when I read that one!

But just anwer one question. Have you used and studied Vedic Mathematics?

What strikes me is that you are not even curious about it and that tellse me a lot! The only thing you seem to do is dismiss these things you don't understand and even haven't researched a tiny bit.

Simply put. You have no idea what you are talking about.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Oh I can do 1/17 very easily but it is shown here before. Haven't you read it?

All I have read is you once again failing to do 1/17 with VM. You just wrote a page on why you could do it if you want but failed to do it. If VM makes you so long winded without being able to solve the problem, I don't see any benefit.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

All I have read is you once again failing to do 1/17 with VM. You just wrote a page on why you could do it if you want but failed to do it. If VM makes you so long winded without being able to solve the problem, I don't see any benefit.

failing? I had a laugh again! Not doing is not failing.
And, you even quoted it, it is already here.
You are miserably failing at discrediting something you don't nothing about.

And, you haven't answered my question. Of course.

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

If it is already here, post a link.

You have repeatedly failed to use "vm" to solve a very simple problem. There are a lot of people here (many who have responded to you) that would love a new way to do math, not because they don't like the old way, but because they love math. You haven't given us that. All you've done is posted a few select problems with 1's and 9's that allow you to take shortcuts. Max challenged you to solve for 1/17. That is about as simple as you can get. You said you'd get to it, then you said it wasn't a problem but you were busy, now you say you already answered although that's a straight out lie. Are you going to answer it using "vm" or not?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

. . . failing? I had a laugh again! Not doing is not failing. . .

Yes it is.

Quehoniaomath wrote:

. . . And, you even quoted it, it is already here. . .

No it isn't. I looked.

Come on. I know you can do it. At least try.
Don't disappoint me.

0 Replies

@engineer,

Quote:

If it is already here, post a link.

gee, it is even in this thread! Look it up!
You just proved you really don't read very well!

Quote:

You have repeatedly failed to use "vm" to solve a very simple problem.

Really? you still mean 1/17????? Come on mate get real now.

Quote:

There are a lot of people here (many who have responded to you) that would love a new way to do math, not because they don't like the old way, but because they love math.

This is simply not true. A lot say they would love it, but in reality when they see it, they even can't believe it and start to dismiss it. Like you do/
But it is very simple. if you are really curious , start studying Vedic Math!
Really, it is soooo damned fast and beautifull.
But there is one catch, I admit, you have to unlearn the idiotic conventional system because that will be in the way.

Quote:

You haven't given us that. All you've done is posted a few select problems with 1's and 9's that allow you to take shortcuts. Max challenged you to solve for 1/17. That is about as simple as you can get.

That is true. But that is for starters.
I have to begin somehwere right? Wink

What is wrong with that?
You really have no clue what VM is all about and the only thing you seem to do is attack something you don't know anything about. Why not showing some curiosity? You don't do that.
I guess when I come with something else you will attack that also. and so on and so forth.

Quote:

You said you'd get to it, then you said it wasn't a problem but you were busy, now you say you already answered although that's a straight out lie. Are you going to answer it using "vm" or not?

The things I said were true and later I realised it was already solved in this thread. Wy do it again? Why all this idiotic fuzz of you?

And yes, if you really start studying Vedic math you will see how enormous intelligent and coherent and beautifull it is.

But you can ONLY experience that if you DO Vedic Mathematics. I can put tons of sums up here, but the thing is you really have to do it yourself.
If you don't do it you will never 'get' it.

And VM can be usesd for arithmetic, algebra, calculus,(differentiation, integration, differntial equations, etc) , trigonometry,and what have you.
I have done it and it is far superior to the western system
( I have studied math/physics for a few year, alas)

And, as I have said before it is even used succesfully in the field of information technology!

Now, as I have asked before, have you studied any Vedic mathematics?

Sigh......

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

The things I said were true and later I realised it was already solved in this thread.

Nope, George even checked for you. Still no 1/17 ?

1 Reply

@engineer,

I checked again too. Nope, no 1/17.

This is a Galatic Matyhematical failure.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

I have said before it is even used succesfully in the field of information technology!

Why yes, you have said that before but if you understood how your tricks work, you would know that they only work in base 10. In base 2 or 16, they are useless and that is what computer systems use. Extracting base 10 digits from base 16 values would be harder than just doing the basic operations directly.

2 Replies

Galactic Matyhematics.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know