I often use tone tags, so in their absence, try to interpret everything I say as literally as reasonable.

Also:

Formerly @ytg@feddit.ch

  • 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
Cake day: March 11th, 2024
  • YTG123@sopuli.xyztoScience Memes@mander.xyz•PSA: LibrariesEnglish
    19·
    2 months ago

    A new public library place recently opened very near to where I live. I’ve nothing to say, am just a bit comforted that when the world is crashing and burning, at least I can be happy about this.

    Also some libraries provide 3D printers which is really cool

    edit: I didn’t notice how many people were commenting about 3D printers

  • YTG123@sopuli.xyztoAtheist Memes@lemmy.world•Stolen imagery
    13·
    2 months ago

    Yup, the calf was most likely a regular part of the northern Israel’s worship, but not of the southern Judah’s. Since most of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) is written from a Judean perspective (which makes sense; it survived longer), it treats it as blasphemous, when in reality, to them, it wasn’t.

  • YTG123@sopuli.xyztoScience Memes@mander.xyz•LinguisticsEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    That has to do with the definition of what a word even is (an open problem!). “Alot” is clearly made up of two separate units, but so is “anyway”. I think a lot of people don’t like this one because it’s simply unnecessary. You need “anyway” to show that the two words are not stressed separately, but treated as one unit, whereas with “a lot” this is already obvious (“a” is almost never stressed).
    Also has to do with English spelling just being bad, generally.

  • YTG123@sopuli.xyztoScience Memes@mander.xyz•I just cited myself.English
    11·
    3 months ago

    For any a, b, c, if a = b and b = c, then a = c, right? The transitive property of equality.
    For any a, b, x, if a = b, then x + a = x + b. The substitution property.
    By combining both of these properties, for any a, b, x, y, if a = b and y = b + x, it follows that b + x = a + x and y = a + x.

    In our example, a is x' (notice the ') and b is 0.999… (by definition). y is 10x' and x is 9. Let’s fill in the values.

    If x' = 0.9999… (true by definition) and 10x = 0.999… + 9 (true by algebraic manipulation), then 0.999… + 9 = x' + 9 and 10x' = x' + 9.

    if you are rearranging algebra you have to do the exact same thing on both sides

    If you actually change any of the sides. Since, after substitution, the numeric value doesn’t change (literally the definition of equality), I don’t have to do anything – as I’m not rearranging. I’m merely presenting the same value in an equivalent manner. By contrast, when multiplying both sides by 10, since multiplication by 10 changes the concrete numeric value, I have to do it on both sides to maintain the equality relation (ditto for subtracting x'). But substitution never changes a numeric value – only rearranges what we already know.

    (Edit)

    Take the following simple system of equations.

    5y = 3
x + y = 6

    How would you solve it? Here’s how I would:

    \begin{gather*} %% Ignore the LaTeX boilerplate, just so I could render it
\begin{cases}
y = \frac{3}{5} \\ % Isolate y by dividing both sides by 5
x = 6 - y % Subtract y from both sides
\end{cases} \\
x = 6 - \frac{3}{5} \\ % SUBSTITUTE 3/5 for y
x = 5.4 \\
(x, y) = (5.4, 0.6)
\end{gather*}

    Here’s how Microsoft Math Solver would do it.