Originally posted by Astner
You do know that there's a difference between high school maths and higher educations maths, right?High school maths centers are calculating, while in university it centers around abstract thinking. In other words, you view it in another light in university.
This is directly false.
It depends on the degree program you take and most of the time, the focus is not on "abstract thinking": it's on theory and process.
Originally posted by dadudemon
This is directly [b]false.It depends on the degree program you take and most of the time, the focus is not on "abstract thinking": it's on theory and process.[/B]
But I'll play. How exactly do you structure theory and process, how do you present generalized functions? With function spaces. Now explain to me how a function space is not an abstract idea.
Originally posted by Astner
Now you're contradicting yourself just to disagree with me.
How am I contradicting myself?
Originally posted by Astner
But I'll play. How exactly do you structure theory and process, how do you present generalized functions? With function spaces. Now explain to me how a function space is not an abstract idea.
You just wanted to say "abstract thinking": what you referenced (not in your above post, but what is being discussed in the thread) has tangible applications.
Originally posted by dadudemon
How am I contradicting myself?
Originally posted by dadudemon
You just wanted to say "abstract thinking": what you referenced (not in your above post, but what is being discussed in the thread) has tangible applications.
Originally posted by Astner
By saying that it's "directly false" to then explain that it "depends on the degree program you take."
That's not a contradiction, even slightly.
Is the following statement true:
"High school maths centers are calculating, while in university it centers around abstract thinking."
No, it is directly false.
Even "abstract" math degrees have quite a few courses and focus on math that you referred to as "calculations".
Astner, u mad, brah?
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not a contradiction, even slightly.Is the following statement true:
"High school maths centers are calculating, while in university it centers around abstract thinking."
No, it is directly false.
Even "abstract" math degrees have quite a few courses and focus on math that you referred to as "calculations".
In high school problems are brought up and you're given concrete explanations on how to solve them, but not necessarily a specific explanations as to why the solutions are solutions.
For instance, you learn how to do basic Riemann integrals in a step-by-step procedure. But you don't prove the Fundamental theorem of calculus, and similar abstract notions requiring an intricate understanding of the theory.
And the Fundamental theorem of calculus is part of single variable analysis, it's later on when you're dealing with various n-dimensional geometries and tensor fields that are impossible to visualize that it gets complicated. Hence, abstract thinking. The purpose of this is of course to be able to identify and solve problems, but to do so you'll have to understand the theory.
Now if you want to continue this debate I'll suggest that you personal message me and take it there, not to derail the thread further.
Originally posted by Astner
Never-mind.I'll need the link before I comment on that.
Before you read link just know I realized the raikages are actually between mach 10-11 as the frs is actually mach 9 and they dodged that as so it is around 10 or 11.
http://www.narutoforums.com/showthread.php?p=22575093
Originally posted by Astner
No, you fail to follow my reasoning.
No, you think you have some awesome complex point, but don't, and fail to see mine.
Originally posted by Astner
In high school problems are brought up and you're given concrete explanations on how to solve them, but not necessarily a specific explanations as to why the solutions are solutions.
Wrong. You literally could not be further from the truth. It is the exact opposite. If you had said grade-school, you would be correct. But you didn't so you're wrong...yet again.
In highschool, the most basic "math" thingie stuffs is teaching why shit is what. Unless, of course, the only thing you did in highschool was simple multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction. If that's what you did in highschool, I understand where you are coming from. That is not what we did in highschool. It focused mostly on theory and how it is executed or realized.
Originally posted by Astner
Now if you want to continue this debate I'll suggest that you personal message me and take it there, not to derail the thread further.
No. You PM me if you want to continue it further.
Originally posted by Rikudo sennin
Before you read link just know I realized the raikages are actually between mach 10-11 as the frs is actually mach 9 and they dodged that as so it is around 10 or 11.
http://www.narutoforums.com/showthread.php?p=22575093
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, you think you have some awesome complex point, but don't, and fail to see mine.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Wrong. You literally could not be further from the truth. It is the exact opposite. If you had said grade-school, you would be correct. But you didn't so you're wrong...yet again.In highschool, the most basic "math" thingie stuffs is teaching why shit is what. Unless, of course, the only thing you did in highschool was simple multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction. If that's what you did in highschool, I understand where you are coming from. That is not what we did in highschool. It focused mostly on theory and how it is executed or realized.
Originally posted by Astner
In high school problems are brought up and you're given concrete explanations on how to solve them, but not necessarily a specific explanations as to why the solutions are solutions.For instance, you learn how to do basic Riemann integrals in a step-by-step procedure. But you don't prove the Fundamental theorem of calculus, and similar abstract notions requiring an intricate understanding of the theory.
Originally posted by dadudemon
No. You PM me if you want to continue it further.
Originally posted by Astner
See chapters 441 and 442, the Rasenshuriken was thrown from somewhere inside of the crater, with no indication of from where it was thrown. It's one of those instances where they make up a distance because they're given a time-frame.The fact that you describe my position as an "awesome complex point" rather than giving a concise description proves—for all intents and purposes—that you have no idea what I'm talking about.
So you don't even finish reading my replies before addressing them? Maybe that's why the arguments in the replies you posts are refuted by the arguments in the replies you quote, and also why you have to delete part of the replies in your quotations.
ill address what you said to me.
"im not saying they're at opposite ends of the crater, I'm saying that after Pain jumped, FRS cleared the entire crater, based on the bottom right panel in this scan:"
http://www.narutobase.net/manga/Naruto/442/8
"If they were standing on the side that FRS exploded on, then both of them (not to mention Naruto's 200+KB) would pretty much been obliterated."
"Looks to me like it cleared the crater, actually. The tip of the explosion which is clearly sending debris backwards due to the trajectory of the FRS is a little beyond where the crater should end."
I quoted the guy who made the calc when people asked this question and he proved them all wrong.
Originally posted by NemeBro
The OBD itself refuted that one, he is now considered mach 10.
Are you sure im sure it was finalized as accepted?! And do you have the link to the mach 10 dangai ichigo speed?
Edit: never mind I found it that's lame especially for the strongest character in bleach.
http://www.narutoforums.com/blog.php?bt=62866
Frankly I think that calc sucks myself.
I can't imagine why they thought calculating speed based off of the amount of hill pulverised was a good idea, as if physical might and speed always correlate (In fiction, I mean. For example, Hulk's punches can simultaneously obliterate mountains and be dodged by Captain America, whom is only supersonic to arguably marginally hypersonic, despite logic indicating that Hulk's fist should be traveling at incredible speeds to be capable of that much destruction).
Originally posted by Astner
The fact that you describe my position as an "awesome complex point" rather than giving a concise description proves—for all intents and purposes—that you have no idea what I'm talking about.
Correction: the fact that I say you think your point is an "awesome complex point" but is not simply means you're enamored with yourself...which should be a very shocking thing for you to read since I'm legendarily arrogant. 🙂
Originally posted by Astner
So you don't even finish reading my replies before addressing them? Maybe that's why the arguments in the replies you posts are refuted by the arguments in the replies you quote, and also why you have to delete part of the replies in your quotations.
Why did you say I loved the taste of Crayons dipped in barbecue sauce, then? You have no evidence of that.
Originally posted by dadudemonThat is an illogical form of thinking.
No.If it came from OBD, it sucks and is wrong. I have not seen a single calc that was right or had good science behind it. They've all been universally wrong from what I've seen.
That every calc you have seen from the OBD is wrong does not necessarily mean that every single calc ever done on the site is wrong (Though I think this one is for reasons unrelated to science or math).
Originally posted by NemeBro
That is an illogical form of thinking.
I've seen about 10 of them and all have been wrong, to hilariously unscientific, to pathetically retarded.
It will be illogical to conclude that I would get a different result at the Ichigo "calc" when I have seen so much horrible abuse of science and math.
Why would one want to continue to dig through shit to find a slice of cheesecake? That's gross.
Originally posted by NemeBro
That every calc you have seen from the OBD is wrong does not necessarily mean that every single calc ever done on the site is wrong (Though I think this one is for reasons unrelated to science or math).
When I use "calc" I'm referring to the overall project they do for each character and/or feat. Not just a simple step of arithmetic.
Edit - And go to the foreign Cinema forum and look at my contributions to the Jack vs. Logan thread. I think I pretty much put that thread to rest.