JBoard.tv

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:28 pm But if you don't know math, you don't KNOW if counting up to some random number first is "useful"

It's not random. It's the next multiple of 10. Then 100. Then 1000. (Forget about the money example - that's a very specific application of the more general principle.)

Maybe the thing to do is not stress about math as a topic. Focus on other topics, like pop culture. You seem to be pretty good at it.

I clammed up on 2 or 3 entire categories yesterday because I'm bad at pop culture. But I can do math.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:28 pm
But if you don't know math, you don't KNOW if counting up to some random number first is "useful".

Yes, and that's the point. You clearly don't understand the math, so asking us how we got our shortcut is (and has been) completely over your head.

Seriously, learn the math and how to do it. This is 2nd grade level stuff we're talking about here. The earlier stuff on the (x-3)^2 was 9th grade level stuff, but it doesn't matter if you don't know how math works.

Also, stop using the word "random" in completely incorrect ways.

I've played with it on a few other problems and never know which number to go to.

Like say 1700-472. What do I add to the 472? Hell if I know.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:23 pm I've played with it on a few other problems and never know which number to go to.

Like say 1700-472. What do I add to the 472? Hell if I know.

I'm dyscalculic and useless at maths, but even I know that you would go to 500, and therefore add 28. So 1700-472 = 1228.

CailinGaoilge wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:36 pm I'm dyscalculic and useless at maths, but even I know that you would go to 500, and therefore add 28. So 1700-472 = 1228.

HOW?!?!

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:43 pm

CailinGaoilge wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:36 pm I'm dyscalculic and useless at maths, but even I know that you would go to 500, and therefore add 28. So 1700-472 = 1228.

HOW?!?!

BECAUSE ONE PLUS ONE ALWAYS EQUALS TWO.
Add the same two numbers over and over, you always always get the same result.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:23 pm I've played with it on a few other problems and never know which number to go to.

Like say 1700-472. What do I add to the 472? Hell if I know.

What's the next multiple of 10 larger than 472?

Spoiler

480. So you add 8 to 472 to get to 480.

Then you go to the next multiple of 100 larger than 480.

Spoiler

500. You add 20 to 480 to get to 500. Now add 8 (from the previous result) to the 20 from this result and you get 28.

CailinGaolige did a shortcut and went straight from 472 to 500, skipping the 480. That's fine if you can do it. I'm trying to teach it so that you never need to do anything more than 1 digit math. (That, and you need to be able to figure out that 1+9 is basically the same problem as 10+90, which is the same problem as 100+900.)

I'll repeat: These are not random numbers. You're going to the next multiple of 10 (then 100, then 1000) that's larger than your starting number.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:43 pm

CailinGaoilge wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:36 pm I'm dyscalculic and useless at maths, but even I know that you would go to 500, and therefore add 28. So 1700-472 = 1228.

HOW?!?!

Because it's the easiest number to go to! Multiples of 100 are easy to work with, and 500 is the nearest one.

You seriously can't be this dense, can you?

1stlvlthinker wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:14 pm You seriously can't be this dense, can you?

Read the last few pages and you tell me.

Peter the accountant wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:54 pm You're going to the next multiple of 10 (then 100, then 1000) that's larger than your starting number.

Why? Can we just answer THAT?

What. Do. I. Add. To. 472. And. Why. That. Number. Specifically.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Peter the accountant wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:54 pm You're going to the next multiple of 10 (then 100, then 1000) that's larger than your starting number.

Why? Can we just answer THAT?

What. Do. I. Add. To. 472. And. Why. That. Number. Specifically.

8. Then. 20. Because. Dealing. With. Round. Numbers. Like. 80. And. 500. Is. Easier. Than. Dealing. With. Numbers. Like. 472.

I. Really. Don't. Know. If. There. Are. Any. Other. Ways. Of. Explaining. This. We've. Been. Over. This. Exact. Same. Thing. Before.

Then I still have to slog through 8 + 20 + whatever, which is just making things a billion times more complicated.

472 + 8 + 20 = okay, 472 is um... carry the one, I literally cannot do this in my head at all...

So I've got the 500 somehow. Now what? I'm trying to get to 1700, not 500.

What would you add to 500 to get 1700?

Bamaman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:44 pm What would you add to 500 to get 1700?

Uh.

1700
-500

...Uh...

...

...

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:43 pm Then I still have to slog through 8 + 20 + whatever, which is just making things a billion times more complicated.

You've just flat out stated that 8+20+200+1000 is more complicated than 1700-472.

Explain to ME how that's possible.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:48 pm

Bamaman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:44 pm What would you add to 500 to get 1700?

Uh.

1700
-500

...Uh...

...

...

I don't believe this reply. I literally cannot and will not believe this. I reject this reality in its entirety. Check please!

Volante wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:49 pm

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:43 pm Then I still have to slog through 8 + 20 + whatever, which is just making things a billion times more complicated.

You've just flat out stated that 8+20+200+1000 is more complicated than 1700-472.

Explain to ME how that's possible.

Because it's way way way way way more steps.

Just stop and move on to a different problem. You have to be able to do 2nd grade level math to grasp the concepts here.

TenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Peter the accountant wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:54 pm You're going to the next multiple of 10 (then 100, then 1000) that's larger than your starting number.

Why? Can we just answer THAT?

Because we're trying to do the simplest math we can.

What. Do. I. Add. To. 472. And. Why. That. Number. Specifically.

8. Because 8 gets you to the next multiple of 10.

The problem is that the question you asked is the wrong question. The right question to ask is: What is the next multiple of 10 that is larger than 472.

Answer that question, please. What is the next multiple of 10 that is larger than 472.

Peter the accountant wrote: ↑Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:13 amBecause we're trying to do the simplest math we can.

Because splitting one problem into ten smaller ones, and then adding all THEM up, is "simpler".

Peter the accountant wrote: ↑Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:13 am Answer that question, please. What is the next multiple of 10 that is larger than 472.

Answer ME why we're going to multiples of 10.