Spiked Math Games  // Math Fail Blog  // Gauss Facts  // Spiked Math Forums  // Spiked Math Comics

home     info     archive     contact     rss

Google+ Page   //   Facebook Page   //   Twitter Page



Recent Comments
  • By keasia in Eggnog by Serge Lang: heyy read in context
  • By Karen in Arts Major vs Math Major: Does this mean that those who are Arts Major are more intelligent than Math Major people? read in context
  • By lola in Eggnog by Serge Lang: yo guys read in context
  • By lara in Eggnog by Serge Lang: www.facebook.com read in context
  • By Karen in The IQ Test: My answer is also 0. Nice one. read in context
  • By Paul Wellstone Toothbrush in "Real" Job Interview: What exactly is the carton trying to convey? I got lost in the setup translation! read in context
  • By Henry feldman in Simple Area Quiz: If you just consider one of the two equal sides as the base, it becomes obvious that the area is a maximum when the other equal side is perpendicular to it, thereby giving the triangle its maximum altitude. The third side is then sqrt2 times it. In this case it's 5*sqrt2=7.07, so it's unclear between 6 and 8 as to which is bigger. So we had to actually do the work. read in context
  • By Eric in Cheering up friends: What did one testicle say to the other testicle? This guy in middle is a dick. read in context
  • By KB in Proofs (Part 2): How do you do an induction proof without the base case (in order to have less case work)? read in context
  • By Somak in Three logicians walk into a bar: nice... read in context
  • By Andrew in Happy Birthday: I am totally gonna use that birthday card idea someday read in context
  • By MikeBear in Three logicians walk into a bar: He would say "No, but I would like one." read in context
  • By Hyon Halvorson in Clever Alex: Quote: "... As in, I decided to unfriend my roommate on Facebook after we had a fight.'..." read in context
  • By mimi ells in 5 tomato feet: or you can say: 5 ppl went 2 a resturant and 8 nothing. (nothing is supposed to be 0) :P read in context
  • By bmonk in Proofs (Part 1): I've heard much the same story about, "Now, from this it is obvious that . . ." read in context
  • By 0.00001 in The Hardest Lolgic Puzzle Evar!: Simple. Call the one on your left A, the middle B, the right C. Ask A if B lies more often than C. If he says yes, ask B the next question, otherwise ask it to C. Suppose you ask B. Ask which of the other two lies more often. The one B does not answer is Random. Then ask if he exists. If B says yes he is True, otherwise he is False. Edit: forgot about DA and JA. Ask if the cat answers Da to the above questions. read in context
  • By 000000 in Math Parents: Probability zero does not mean it cannot happen. Suppose I randomly pick an integer what is the probability I pick 63? It's zero, but I still could pick 63. read in context
  • By 00000 in MPF - Hats: If you see a mix, guess the opposite, else pass. 75% chance of winning read in context
  • By dillion in Eggnog by Serge Lang: Ddffdddd read in context
  • By jay in MFT - Lake Escape: what about this variation? An escaped prisoner finds himself in the middle of a square swimming pool. The guard that is chasing him is at one of the corners of the pool. The guard can run faster than the prisoner can swim. The prisoner can run faster than the guard can run. The guard does not swim. Which direction should the prisoner swim in in order to maximize the likelihood that he will get away? read in context
  • By A person that supports Pi. in The Pi Manifesto: Come on! It is a simple conversion. It is a factor of two. Think of it as (2pi) * fraction. Don't simplify the fraction until the end. Pi has it's uses like πr² read in context
  • By Bob Durrant in Eggnog by Serge Lang: Presumably ostrich eggs and a Nebuchadnezzar of cognac are intended. read in context
  • By KB in Eggnog by Serge Lang: How does that add up to 7 gallons? read in context
  • By the Green in Happy Birthday: * HAPPY BIRTHDAY, KELVIN Don't forget the comma. read in context
  • By pablo in Superman: What if superman was singular? read in context
  • By Bob Durrant in Eggnog by Serge Lang: Lang's Eggnog 1 bottle Remy Martin VSOP (Presumably any VSOP will do, but any lesser cognac will result in a correspondingly less smooth taste and is at your own risk!) 2 quarts milk 1 quart cream 1 pound sugar 1 dozen yolks of eggs, beaten Mix the above well. 1 dozen whites of eggs, beaten stiff, fold into the above. Nutmeg read in context
  • By Jonathan Landrum in Eggnog by Serge Lang: The recipe itself was quite illegible. Any takers on an interpretation? read in context
  • By Richard in Three logicians walk into a bar: I still don't get this. Saying "I don't know" might be necessary but it still doesn't convey the same semantic meaning as "yes". What the first two logicians seem to be conveying is indeterminacy at best. Under the rules of three value logic, two indeterminate responses and one true response combined in a conjunction would be false. read in context
  • By Paul Rubin in Eggnog by Serge Lang: No idea who the reviewer might be, but the author of the recipe is presumably this Serge Lang: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_Lang (well-known, at least in my day). read in context
  • By Cory Viands in A ____ walks into a bar: Definitely a delight to browse your content and find out about your thoughts and opinions on dental subjects, seems you really do have a natural talent for writing impressive stuff! read in context
  • By Wayne Weber in Three logicians walk into a bar: (Corrected) We could turn this into a logical puzzle: Three logicians walk into a bar and the bartender says to them "Do all of YOU want a beer?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "We'll have two beers." Who gets the beers? read in context
  • By Wayne Weber in Three logicians walk into a bar: We could turn this into a logical puzzle: Three logicians walk into a bar and the bartender says to them "Do all of want a beer?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "We'll have two beers." Who gets the beers? read in context
  • By (x, why?) in Three logicians walk into a bar: Because if they didn't want a beer, then they could honestly say No, not everyone wants beer. read in context
  • By Shadowsnail in LaTeX: To hunt for mysterious errors, I always divide the document into successively smaller pieces and compile each part separately. Eventually, you will rule out all the portions with no errors and zero in on the problem (though I often end up with a permanent error I don't know how to fix anyway) read in context
  • By Axxle in Proofs (Part 1): I had no idea there were mouseovers. Now I have to go through all the comics again! Yay! read in context
  • By Ross Presser in Proofs (Part 2): I miss the psi :( read in context
  • By Michael Watts in Proofs (Part 2): Bart: Couldn't you have just turned up the heat a little? Dr. Hibbert: No. It had to be terror sweat! read in context
  • By Luca in Football: The 42-ers hahah!!, read in context
  • By Martin in Proofs (Part 1): @tim, I second that :) read in context
  • By MJ in Proofs (Part 1): Professor Łojasiewicz from Jagiellonian University(Poland) once showed a proof of one implication in two hours. It was less than a minute until the end of lecture, so he looked at this theorem and said: 'And the other implication is trivial'. Students were too shy to ask professor how it is trivial, although they didn't see it themselves. Days passed and at an oral exam Łojasiewicz told first student to prove that theorem. Student proved shortly one implication and then said: 'and the other implication is trivial'. Professor was sitting still for 15 minutes, thinking intensively. Finally he said: 'You're right, it is trivial' and he gave student highest possible note :D read in context
  • By Tim in Proofs (Part 1): The mouse over feels more accurate today :( read in context
  • By Emanon Suomynona in It's a small world (after all): The question "if distance walked has infinite resolution?" is an open one, if space is discrete then it is false. We know that the action potentials traveling down the spine are discrete events involving discrete numbers of ions moving across the membranes. The only possible differences are subtle temporal differences, and given the way muscles work it is likely that minute subnanosecond temporal differences are averaged out in general and thus make no real difference to outcome. While the displays have finite resolution something like the video box can have extreme close-ups which can likely exceed human eye resolution. IF you've sub-millimeter resolution of the walking of a human for all practical purposes you've captured that event. There even are likely Atomic force microscopy-like images of the atoms on your feet making contact with the atoms on the floor at different areas within the video box. read in context
  • By Emanon Suomynona in It's a small world (after all): I should add when I say all videos are subtitled, I meant that there are copies of all videos with subtitles of course copies without subtitles also exist in the box. read in context
  • By Emanon Suomynona in It's a small world (after all): "1. The limitations of 2D video (example, a video of my life filmed from exactly in front of me throughout my life would have an enormous number of variations due to invisible (to a 2D camera) differences, such as a scar on my back." The box contains even two slightly different images yielding stereoscopic 3d if you use them. There are also images from all around you, 360 degrees, and in x-rays, infrared, etc. "2. Non-audiovisual phenomena. If I live my life twice in the exact same way except that at one point I think in my head the word "was" in one life and "were" in the other, there are two variations that would be identical in the hypothetical video box." No there are videos with subtitled thoughts, so all possible thoughts are subtitled on all videos. "3. Again, the limitations of the video. No matter how high the resolution, there will be variances that it can't pick up (such as if I'm half a nanometer to the left of where I was in another variation). Although this point is arguably moot in the event that the resolution exceeds that of the human eye. Same for framerate." Let's be honest here, nanometer and femtometer variations that do not yield any discernible difference to the description of your life, shouldn't really be counted as distinct ways to live your life. read in context
  • By Emanon Suomynona in It's a small world (after all): There are also videos with subtitles of thoughts as occurs in today's movies. read in context
  • By Emanon Suomynona in It's a small world (after all): It doesn't matter that the causes are being modeled or are not being modeled at a planck scale. The possibility of causing a hurricane or not causing as well as doing so in arbitrary location exists in the video files. So all the events exists even if the reason for them existing and differing might not be present. The simple fact is that a human body viewed from all possible angles in all distinguishable states via a video will exist in the video box, it doesn't matter if there are subatomic imperceptible differences whatever these differences cause will also be in discernible video form if they're meaningful. There is no need to rely on the subatomic physics, that said there are also images of the binary states of different sections of the memory of a planck scale simulation in the video box. read in context
  • By Darian Smith in It's a small world (after all): Regards eyes and senses. Let's be realistic here. For all practical purposes if you've videos from all 360 degrees around you for each and every single moment and possible action in your life, you basically have all possible states in there. Even thoughts will be present as subtitles in some videos. The only thing left is raw sensations of taste, smell, etc. But apart from that even a low resolution black and white video suffices to show all distinct events in your life. read in context
  • By Darian Smith in It's a small world (after all): Regards the possibility of discerning meaningful content from meaningless static noise. There might exist a finite fractal-like formula or index that could easily allow one to arrive at arbitrary yet meaningful videos. We know that static noise is at least mathematically distinct from a regular image, there might be ways to use that to select videos. read in context
  • By Andrei Kostyrka in Mathkind: Just wait a tic, a mathematician from Kazakhstan M. Otelbayev has just claimed that he had found the solution for Navier---Stokes equaions. The Clay Institute is verifying it right now. read in context