bfchat.brainformation.com

Yes, it's March 14th.
That is all.

3.14 is a good day for Pi - so celebrate it with a pie!

aye aye pi

we had cake instead, thanks to squeaki's b day, a ginormous black forest.

If that's the same a German Chocolate, I'll be right over.

ja! but hurry, it's pretty popular.

Start making the latte, I'll be on the first jet out. I've had BOTH my vacs now and feel safe.

bah, i'm still waiting for my first one and not happy!

You're not old enough. I'm special in that regard.

I chose PIe instead of cake. I turned 74 today, and man do I feel it, hi hi.

One tiny slice of pumpkin pie and about a half can of real whipped cream, hi hi.

Pondering if I will see 75, which the docs say is not likely. Of course they didn't think I would make it to 74, perhaps I'll be able to fool them, and the grim reaper, for another year.

Congratulations on reaching the ripe old age of 74.

At our age we deserve to eat anything we care to, but I've always been suspicious of that canned whipped cream. As far as getting to 75 goes, it's my sincere hope and desire that you can reach that diamond jubilee. It's going to be very quiet around these forums if you don't cuz I'm looking forward to being around to celebrate my 93rd trip around the sun. Plus, I hate talking to myself.

Thank You Yogi!

I came back because I forgot to give you a simple problem to solve with your new computer.

It works like this:

Pick ANY Number, any number of digits.
There are only two Rules to apply.
If the number is ODD, multiply by 3 and ADD 1.
If the number is EVEN divide by 2.
Keep applying these two Rules to the answer number obtained.

E.g. 7 x 3 = 21 +1 = 22
22 is even so divide by 2 and you get 11
11 is odd so multiply by 3 and add 1 = 34
34 is even so divide by 2 is 17
17 is odd so multiply by 3 and add 1 = 52, etc.

Enjoy!

Greetings on your 74th. As I say to close friends, You still have to keep going... The rest of the people that had been to this site may have forgotten about it, so I'd understand if Dennis decides to close the site due to lack of participation... Anyway, cheers on your day and may many of them be on your future.

Thank You Oceloti!

I do keep a positive attitude and frame of mind. It's the only way to live to the fullest, regardless of the situation one may be in.

That's the kind of challenge which lends itself to linear programming. I know there is a lesson attached to that problem, but I don't remember what it is. Faulty memory is also a feature of being a septuagenarian. Be that as it may, I don't have any programming languages installed and at this stage probably wouldn't know what to do with them if I did. If it can be worked out in a spreadsheet I may be able to do it. LOL

I will pass on the computer updates in the appropriate thread.

It is called Collatz Conjecture, besides a hundred other names tacked onto it.
It has never been solved without ending up in a 4-2-1 loop.
It is one of those problems that will get you booted out of mathematics for even trying, hi hi.
Even though the graph of numbers appears totally random and different for each number.
There has never been found a number, even up the trillions that will not end up at 1.

It is the perfect problem to give to math majors to get them laughed at by academia, hi hi.

My wife happens to be a math major. We married during her last year at school, for which her father was eternally grateful. He not only didn't have to support her anymore, but also did not pay for that last year of education. I was and still am terrible at math but I recall some of the classes my wife had to take. One of them was called Infinite Series in which I am certain the Collatz Conjecture was studied. Of course I had to ask my friend Google to explain all this to me.

As of 2020, the conjecture has been checked by computer for all starting values up to 268 ≈ 2.95×1020. All initial values tested so far eventually end in the repeating cycle (4; 2; 1) of period 3.

This computer evidence is not sufficient to prove that the conjecture is true for all starting values. As in the case of some disproved conjectures, like the Pólya conjecture, counterexamples might be found when considering very large numbers.

However, such verifications may have other implications. For example, one can derive additional constraints on the period and structural form of a non-trivial cycle.

So, apparently, the reason why this conjecture is not a theorem is because not all the possible numbers (an infinite amount) have been tested. And, no mere math degree candidate could possibly solve it. These conjectures are the kind of things mathematicians live for. I guess it's good food for thought. I don't see it ever having any practical significance other than to show such things exist.

I had another one I used to play with, it was sorta like PI in a way, as it never had a repeating series of numbers.

Math was never my high point, hi hi. But I did learn what I had to know in order to do the various jobs I've had over the years.
Heck, when I was a draftsman doing an engineers job, I had to learn all about tangents, arc tangents, sines, co-sines, and a whole slew of other weird things. But I had a few small booklets I put together as memory joggers on what to use where and when, sometimes with the why and always with the how.
You have to remember, back when I was doing engineering, we didn't have calculators, much less computers. I normally used a Slide Rule, a nice one too, Log Log Duplex Decitrig. But our office also had a couple manually operated Friden Machines, the precursor to the calculator.
Albeit, some of the problems were so complex, we did have to punch IMB cards by hand and feed them to the mainframe after it was installed. But it didn't do much more than we could do by hand, it was just faster is all.

There is an amazing amount of trigonometry that goes into architectural design. You can't simply say a building will not collapse under its own weight, you have to be able to prove it in court. That's where the math becomes important. I was pretty good with a slide rule and logarithms when I was an astrologer. Back then computers just started to be available to the common man, but programmable calculators were easy to get. There were books of logarithm tables to help things along. I took one with me to an FCC exam once just in case I needed it. The examiner didn't think I would but wanted to see the book before I opened it up. He was right. I didn't have to open the book. I loved geometry but never got the hang of trig so that when I needed formulas for a calculation I had reference books from which to copy them. In several instances I had no idea what I was calculating, but the results looked good. LOL

My very first official job was an office boy in an envelope company. They had a few Feiden Machines for the bookkeeping. I eventually was given the task of calculating sales persons commissions and got to use the Friden. And I agree with you, It sure was clunky compared to a desktop calculator.

I never did good in Algebra at school, but when I got into Geometry, for some reason I understood it, and actually enjoyed it. But then Trig threw me for a loop again for a while. I really didn't understand it until I used it a lot in my drafting work. Caught many mistakes made by the engineers, and which is why I ended up getting moved up into the engineering department. Although, since I didn't have a degree, I couldn't officially hold the title with that company. However, at the next company I worked for, I did almost all the emergency engineering tasks, and got many pats on the back because I saved them tons of money, hi hi.

I had one programmable calculator in my life, and it was a royal pain in the arse to use too.