Need a Math Solution!

This is a Commutative property problem. Fundamental algebra.

Solution:

A(n)+B(n)+C(n)=(A+B+C)n

If you look in the book, you'll probably find they are studying distributive and commutative properties of numbers. Above the problem does it say Simplify?

And depending on what country you live in, this very well could be a 3rd grade math problem. Hell, it could be a third grade math problem here, if our heads weren't shoved so far up our fat television sets.


[edit on 4-10-2004 by DeltaChaos]

Originally posted by everlastingnoitall
Well, like I said, I think I agree that it is referring Fermat's Last, but I need to ask his teacher on Monday. Probably my kid wrote it down wrong.

Then it seems like your son made the negative sign positive. Instead of A^n + B^n - C^n = ? he wrote A^n + B^n + C^n = ?.
So if that is the case, wouldn't the answer = zero?

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
And depending on what country you live in, this very well could be a 3rd grade math problem. Hell, it could be a third grade math problem here, if our heads weren't shoved so far up our fat television sets.

I agree.

[edit on 3-10-2004 by jp1111]

First id liek to say its im possible because the are no given values and second of all why is your third grader getting math problems like this/

Originally posted by SmokeyTheBear
First id liek to say its im possible because the are no given values and second of all why is your third grader getting math problems like this/

It's not impossible. The problem does not imply solving for n. Or A or B or C, for that matter. It is an exercise to help a student learn simplification of equations using the commutative property of numbers.

Originally posted by Aether

Originally posted by Ut


The big bang theory is not based on common sense at all. It's based on emperical observations. Background static, the idea that the cosmic redshift is doppler in nature, and a relationship between the distances to other galaxies and the speed at which they're receeding from us. Common sense isn't used in the sciences because, more often than one would care to admit, it in no way describes reality.

lol
LOL
LOL


whats your educational background?

[edit on 2-10-2004 by Aether]

Yea what is so funny as UT commented. Would you ever have thougth that time slows down in the presence of gravity or high velocities as general and special relaivity would have you believe? COmmon sense would say no, but science says yes it is.

How did such a simple problem lead to Fermat's theorem and Big Bang cosmology?

Forget (n) representing an exponent just because it usually represents an exponent in superscript. In this case, being surrounded with parenthesis, the (n) obviously represents any (n)umber.

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
How did such a simple problem lead to Fermat's theorem and Big Bang cosmology?

Forget (n) representing an exponent just because it usually represents an exponent in superscript. In this case, being surrounded with parenthesis, the (n) obviously represents any (n)umber.

The guy stated it meant to the power of read the first post : P

And I was laughing at how he responded. It is common sense, just the way you explained is not common sense : P

Originally posted by Aether

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
How did such a simple problem lead to Fermat's theorem and Big Bang cosmology?

Forget (n) representing an exponent just because it usually represents an exponent in superscript. In this case, being surrounded with parenthesis, the (n) obviously represents any (n)umber.

The guy stated it meant to the power of read the first post : P

And I was laughing at how he responded. It is common sense, just the way you explained is not common sense : P

The kid wrote it down wrong. The kid is probably learning what 2^n is at the same time he's learning An + Bn + Cn = (A+B+C)n and he just got confused. He's in third grade. There's no way he was presented with the problem as exponents, it just doesn't make any sense.

Zip

Originally posted by Aether

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
How did such a simple problem lead to Fermat's theorem and Big Bang cosmology?

Forget (n) representing an exponent just because it usually represents an exponent in superscript. In this case, being surrounded with parenthesis, the (n) obviously represents any (n)umber.

The guy stated it meant to the power of read the first post : P

And I was laughing at how he responded. It is common sense, just the way you explained is not common sense : P

It's not common sense. In fact, you only come up with the big bang if you assume the cosmological redshift is a doppler redshift, and there are pleanty of people out there who aren't willing to jump to that assumption.

Yes UT, but logically it just makes sense what the theory's purpose is and how it functions.

This may be need for another thread, but i've always wanted to know something about that redshifting stuff. I asked my astonomy teacher back in highschool about 2 years ago and he just tried to play stupid. So, we're (the earth/our solar system) inside this galaxy right? Our solar system is spinning around on the curved axis of an arm making up this galaxy.

How do we get pictures of what our galaxy looks like if we can't get out of solar system?

And

How does the doppler effect or redshift (the wavelength theory one) provide itself to be true, if we are spinning around this galaxy regardless?

Originally posted by Ut
It's not common sense. In fact, you only come up with the big bang if you assume the cosmological redshift is a doppler redshift, and there are pleanty of people out there who aren't willing to jump to that assumption.

You're just being fecetious now, right? Yes you are.