talkmagic.co.uk

Marvell wrote:How hard can a binary fraction be?

That depends if it's carrying a flick-knife or not

Soz but I just couldn't resist

Some objects are actually easy to visualise in 4 dimensions. As a start try to visualise a point in a 4 dimensional space. A point is still just a point though it is not quite clear how to visualise a point.

One way to visualise 4 dimensional objects is to imagine that you "move" along the 4s dimension at a steady speed only "watching" a 3dimension cross section of the object at any given moment. A 4 dimensional ball, will then firtst be a empty space, from which a small ordinary ball suddently begin to grow until it reach its maximal size and then begin to shrink until it vanish.

A wonderful magic effect that unfortunately requires 4D.

Maybe someone could write a book on 4 dimensional magic.

stepSeven wrote:How's your binary fractions Tomo (or anyone else for that matter)?

When I was doing A-level Comp. Sci. I could do floating point arithmetic really well, which was handy because I couldn't do long division any other way. It's just something I've always had a blind spot for.

Soren Riis wrote:Maybe someone could write a book on 4 dimensional magic.

in theory i could scribble something down, but the idea that anyone would get it is probably out of the 5th dimensional window.
i was trying to explain to someone last night that you can call a particle a point particle all you like, it's still 3 dimensional! although perhaps a photon could be 0-dimensional, and i think i've heard someone claim that a blackhole is 0-dimensional, although does affect 3-D space.
ok, back to dimensions, we're all working in cartesian co-ordinates here really arn't we? what's a 4th dimension to a spherical or cyclindrical co-ordinate system?

my maths problem for the next few weeks is: should i spend all the holiday revising, or spend the first week or so learning about how to remember things from one of those fabulous books i keep hearing about, hence possibly cutting my revision time in half but maybe more than doubling its effectiveness?
the worrying thing is, I'm actually doing the game theory for this in my head now. all i need are some percentages, or advice. anyone? which way should i go?

Ere! Never mind 4 or 5 D. Try 248! Lie groups sound like a lot of fun!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/20/e8_liegroup/

Lawrence wrote:the worrying thing is, I'm actually doing the game theory for this in my head now. all i need are some percentages, or advice. anyone? which way should i go?

Do game theory full time.
Come up with an addictive new game format.
Pitch it to http://www.celador.co.uk/.
Retire.

How hard can a binary fraction be?

I'm trying to understand the relationship between binary fractions and Monge (Mongean) shuffles.

I'm finding that pretty hard

Any takers?

Tomo wrote:

Lawrence wrote:the worrying thing is, I'm actually doing the game theory for this in my head now. all i need are some percentages, or advice. anyone? which way should i go?

Do game theory full time.
Come up with an addictive new game format.
Pitch it to http://www.celador.co.uk/.
Retire.

it's not quite the same. it's more... economics i guess. john nash was a legend, he came along with his crazy notions about only being 2 outcomes of anything, everyone thought he was rubbish, then a bit later he comes back and basically slaps adam smith in the economical face and says "ha, eat my game theory [expletive deleted]"

I'm either going to do analysis or cryptography full time. or juggle, or spin... or be a magician (what a concept!)
probably end up in a bar somewhere though

Lawrence wrote:I'm either going to do analysis or cryptography full time. or juggle, or spin... or be a magician (what a concept!)

Getting into cryptography and drawing a civil service pension seems a good life to me.

i could go work for MI6 or something
"i can crack codes, and makes things randomly disappear"