You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Simple Maths

2

Comments

  • GREGHOGGGREGHOGG Member Posts: 7,155
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    How can you divide nothing? its like if we had a basket with no bananas in it, how can i halve those non existent bananas or  would it be yes we have no bananas? or am i talking bananas?
    Posted by loonytoons
    The probability that you are talking bananas is less than the probability of half of a non-existent banana being divided by half and then becoming a whole banana, when actually it should become a quarter of a non-existent banana.

    maths is bananas, end of.


  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    How can you divide nothing? its like if we had a basket with no bananas in it, how can i halve those non existent bananas or  would it be yes we have no bananas? or am i talking bananas?
    Posted by loonytoons
    well-- no tomatoes are still red, so they must be there somewhere, but invisible
  • LOL_RAISELOL_RAISE Member Posts: 2,188
    edited June 2010
    a half of a half is a quarter but we arent looking for that, we want to divide it by a half, which is equivalent of multiplying by 2. using my a level in maths, i concur that 0.5 *2 is indeed 1
  • Donut64Donut64 Member Posts: 2,666
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths : well-- no tomatoes are still red, so they must be there somewhere, but invisible
    Posted by oynutter
     You are making the presumption the no tomatoes are ripe if you think they are red! Could they not also be green or yellow?
     As all colours are created by the light shone upon them their is only a perception of colour their is no actual true colour that exists!
  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 169,885
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    a half of a half is a quarter but we arent looking for that, we want to divide it by a half, which is equivalent of multiplying by 2. using my a level in maths, i concur that 0.5 *2 is indeed 1
    Posted by LOL_RAISE
    Check your PM's Mr Raise, please!
  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    lol-- how can it be the same as multiplying by two??-- 2 x 2= 4----2 / 2 = 1---a level--??
  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths :  You are making the presumption the no tomatoes are ripe if you think they are red! Could they not also be green or yellow?  As all colours are created by the light shone upon them their is only a perception of colour their is no actual true colour that exists!
    Posted by Donut64
    They are sainsburys tomotoes,so they are perfectly red, although they do also sell green ones, just to please everyone--- except Tikay, who would'nt eat green ones, even if there were none of them
  • BelovedLtdBelovedLtd Member Posts: 188
    edited June 2010
    he means like this  - (although it would look better if I knew how to insert the divide symbol)


    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    ... mechanically (although I can't find a proper divide symbol :(

    1/2  /  1/2  =  1/2 x 2/1  = 2/2  =  1 

    ...
    Posted by BelovedLtd


  • POKERTREVPOKERTREV Member Posts: 9,607
    edited June 2010
    5 divided by 5 = 1
    4 divided by 4 = 1
    3 divided by 3 = 1
    2 divided by 2 = 1
    1 divided by 1 = 1

    so 1/2 divided by a 1/2 = 1 however it is one half and not 1 whole 1

    1/2 divide into a half is a 1/4
  • BelovedLtdBelovedLtd Member Posts: 188
    edited June 2010
    ok I give up on trying to work out why the quote went weird in that post, but the content is what matters
  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    5 divided by 5 = 1 4 divided by 4 = 1 3 divided by 3 = 1 2 divided by 2 = 1 1 divided by 1 = 1 so 1/2 divided by a 1/2 = 1 however it is one half and not 1 whole 1 1/2 divide into a half is a 1/4
    Posted by POKERTREV
     1 what?--- tomato?
     
  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    or banana?
  • aussie09aussie09 Member Posts: 8,033
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths : They are sainsburys tomotoes,so they are perfectly red, although they do also sell green ones, just to please everyone--- except Tikay, who would'nt eat green ones, even if there were none of them
    Posted by oynutter
    oynutter... a brilliant cross reference to yesterday's dilemma

  • elsadogelsadog Member Posts: 5,677
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths :  You are making the presumption the no tomatoes are ripe if you think they are red! Could they not also be green or yellow?  As all colours are created by the light shone upon them their is only a perception of colour their is no actual true colour that exists!
    Posted by Donut64
    This is not quite so. Colour exists as pigment which is subtractive colour. When light shines on anything some of the light is absorbed and some is reflected. The reflected light (additive) is what we see, the colour of the reflected light from the pigment. If the three primary pigments (Magenta, Cyan and Yellow) are mixed in equal parts the resultant colour is Black (before someone points it out, yes Black is termed a neutral) but if we mix the three primary colours of light (Red, Blue and Green) we get the colour (again a neutral) White. Therefore the colours do exist, it's just that without light we cannot see them. The absence of light doesn't mean You don't exist.
  • penguin7penguin7 Member Posts: 1,095
    edited June 2010
    I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators.

    I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?



  • aussie09aussie09 Member Posts: 8,033
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
    Posted by penguin7
    ... and on the 8th day God created pascal... probably


  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths : This is not quite so. Colour exists as pigment which is subtractive colour. When light shines on anything some of the light is absorbed and some is reflected. The reflected light (additive) is what we see, the colour of the reflected light from the pigment. If the three primary pigments (Magenta, Cyan and Yellow) are mixed in equal parts the resultant colour is Black (before someone points it out, yes Black is termed a neutral) but if we mix the three primary colours of light (Red, Blue and Green) we get the colour (again a neutral) White. Therefore the colours do exist, it's just that without light we cannot see them. The absence of light doesn't mean You don't exist.
    Posted by elsadog
    Yeh!!-- you tell im elsadog, just because we have got no tomatoes, it don't mean they ain't red innit-- anyone can see that no tomatoes are still red !!--- and I'm taking no tomatoes down to the cellar right now, where I will take a photo of them without a flash-- so I will return with proof that no tomatoes are red, even in the dark--so there donut features!!!
  • oynutteroynutter Member Posts: 4,773
    edited June 2010
    Just got back from the cellar--- It's a fact donut-- no tomatoes are red and invisible--- so there!!!!
  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 169,885
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
    Posted by penguin7
    Ooh, me too!

    I was a "settler", & this was not only before computers, it was before the betting shop calculating tool called a "Genie".

    Loved it, & to this day, I still use my mental arithmetic "tricks" in preference to any calculator or PC when calculating odds & returns.

    We had "short cuts" for prices like 11/8 & 13/8 (e.g., evens + a quarter +  half + 1 for original stake etc) & it's a terrific way to keep mental agility. The change to decimal odds, whilst sad for traditionalists like me, just makes calculating betting odds & returns something a 3 year old should be able to do in their head.

    Sadly, it ain't so. I was in a shop today, & the bill came to £10.06, so I proferred £20.06, expecting a tenner change. The girl returned the 6p to me, baffled by it's intent. I explained it, & she said, "oh, I see, sorry, but the cash register calculates the change for me, & I can't do it your way, how would I know how much change you need". 

    And Blair promised us "Education, education, education".......
  • MereNoviceMereNovice Member Posts: 4,364
    edited June 2010
    In Response to Re: Simple Maths:
    I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
    Posted by penguin7
    There are many interesting features of Pascal's Triangle.
    I must admit that I wasn't aware of it being used by bookmakers, though - nice one.

    It can be used to work out the number of "combinations" which is, perhaps, the same thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.