Messages

         

thank you

hahaha :lol: hahaha  really addictive    you just make me happier  :wink:

does she speaking something?

:smt078  :smt023  :smt039  :smt063  :finga:  :smt118  :smt040

what is Illness?

yes, Silver Spirit is a good team, like you said  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D

let a real mathematic answer it :

/Mathematics lesson ON

If you mean a result as 22.xxx, then you need to write 73/(1.79*1.79).
Without "(" and ")", operations must be done in the order they are written, therefore 73/1.79*1.79 means "written on paper" (as argammon says) :
     73
  -------- * 1.79 = 73
    1.79

accurately

Mathematically, * and / must be done before + and -.
But there is no order between + and -, and no order between / and *.
This is a mathematic rule, not an interpretation. :wink:

this isn't a rule, it's a definition! so different...

Let me give example : 2+3*5=17, and not 25.
* has priority compared to +, so first you must calculate 3*5=15, and then calculate 15+2=17.

thus defined

But 73*1.79/1.79=73/1.79*1.79=73. No priority order, operations must be done in the order they are written.

multiplication's associative property

Same thing for 2+3-1=2-1+3=4. No priority order.

addition associative property

You need to write 73/(1.79*1.79) to have 22.xxxx has a result.

Anyway, as Argammon says, some bad calculators do not recognize the operation priorities, so 2+3*5 would give 25 as a result.
This is wrong. To have 25 as a result, you have to write (2+3)*5.

Ask your mathematics teacher if you want confirmation. :-D

/Mathematics lesson OFF

that's right, but Argammon didn't said it  :-D
just have care with your words, "operation priorities" is wrong, it's a defined operation orders, not a prioeities  :wink:

ok, maybe I can calculate it  

2006-04-15 00:49   Renato Biker   0:47.75   M   RUNS   RUNS

CTG, where can I see how much leading hours I have now?

to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat, to sleep and eat,...

I have a new PC so I haven't been able to play stunts in it yet. But I'll wake up and regain my lost position. :twisted:

yes, your second place :!: but not the first  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D

I think CTG is right. High 46 is doable but I don't think many if noone will do it in this race.

that's very right  

let's create a new topic: "the name of Vamolo.."  

I said I was not meaning you. I know you where blame for that as Alain did when he was the champion, so don't worry.
By the way, I find some of your jokes funny so keep on that!

ok    ;-)

look how a formula 1 engine works  :wink:  VERY GREAT :!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAo6QTrCq4o&search=formula%201

I talked about 46:xx, it's improbable (if it's possible). I think 46:xx is possible only with some bug bumps... it's just my opinion, not a provocation