this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
361 points (92.3% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

8054 readers
29 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 89 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There's 3 variables and 1 equation. This is unsolvable.

Since we're just making shit up anyway

Assume k=0 and n is the last natural number. Solved.

[–] radicalautonomy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's called a literal equation. The problem doesn't state which variable to solve for, but the assumption here is that it is x. Solving literal equations is a basic part of mathematics courses.

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm a mathematician and I can't recall a time I've ever heard the term "literal equation." When I was in grade school the instructions were always "solve for x" if x was the variable being solved for.

[–] Funkytom467@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Maybe it's not universal but in school literal equation basically meant there were letters instead of numbers.

It's the term we use for instance when going from the equation of a line like y=3x+2 to lines in general y=ax+b (a and b in ℝ)

And i agree it's a lot better to specify to solve for x (because you can solve for anything or have multiple variables).

Although x being a variable, and solving for it would be the most logical assumption.

[–] radicalautonomy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I teach secondary and postsecondary math courses. The term "literal equation" was used in Texas where I taught for 17 years. The Algebra 1 state standard A.12E says that students are expected to "solve mathematic and scientific formulas, and other literal equations, for a specified variable." I also taught college undergrad courses in Texas, including College Algebra, and I don't recall ever seeing the the term used there, but I used it in class because my students were familiar with it. Now I teach in Oregon, and the term is not a part of this state's standards from what I can tell.

[–] cloudless@lemmy.cafe 51 points 1 year ago

Grading your own work is stupid.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Would only work if the numerator was 𝑛 + sin 𝑥

[–] lustyargonian@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That's for AP. Elementary logic let's you divide willy nilly

[–] cmgvd3lw@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I cannot actually believe that back in the day, I understood what these were.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

How fake do you want it?

Yes

[–] sag@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

WTF bro, There is 3 variables.

Wait? NVM Wait?

Today I did Calculus for 6 hour straight. So, don't mind me I am just tired.

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a teacher with no sense of humour

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There's no teacher. Everything on that paper was most likely written by a single person.

[–] CodexArcanum@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

All the "s"s do look very similar.

Source: I am the world's foremost forensic handwriting expert

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The ink does have a different color

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't, it's just speculation, hence "most likely". I see similar handwriting and not a very plausible problem.

[–] lustyargonian@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

x = arcsin (kn - 1)

I've solved it. There you go. I hope you use this solution for something good.

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

It was already solved. For k.

[–] TaviRider@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

Solve for 1:

1 = kn - sin x

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

K, but unless information isn’t shown regarding n this is unsolvable.

[–] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Facebook outrage post

[–] aggelalex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

In regards to x, x=arcsin(kn+1), where kn is between -2 and 0