Why do americans struggle with basic maths?

Is it a lack of intelligence or is the education system at fault?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |

Skip to content
# Why do americans struggle with basic maths? Is it a lack of intelligence or is the education system at fault?

###

Why do americans struggle with basic maths?

Is it a lack of intelligence or is the education system at fault?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |

Black folk

Spics*

You need homies to slaughter the invading latinx. Put them to use like old times. BBC New world order cannot be stopped and that requires total latinx death.

and nobody in this thread can explain why 0^0 = 1

other than

>ITS JUST THAT OK?

most of you have a superficial understanding of math, memorize which rule is prioritized without knowing why is not impressive

so you are no better than an actual Black person

But I'm not struggling tho

Imagine how you would feel if you changed the smoke alarm battery?

this is what atheism leads to

Black person, the bible says the wisdom of man is foolishness

checked

but not exactly.

It says that the foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of man.

It also says that worldly wisdom is contrary to Godly wisdom, which is true.

it says

>for the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the sight of god

and paul goes on to say put aside foolishness

hmm

worldliness is a big no no in the Bible.

Do not love the world, reject the world, etc.

When speaking in human terms, the world is the secular human culture. It doesn't mean what the world means to God, which is life, humanity, etc.

Look at the secular culture of the world right now, it's a disgrace.

The Bible says that the devil is prince of the powers of the air, essentially ruler of the secular world.

math is not biblical, its worldly wisdom

Nope, if you look at the nature of reality it's all math.

God's creation is mathematically perfect. It all lines up perfectly.

Once you realize this you will realize God exists.

the wisdom of man is all based on physical observation you dunce

I observe black hooker ass getting HIV when I bust in them raw. Gotta be the ass though.

math isn't based on observation, it's based on reason alone. it's transcendental

> God's creation is mathematically perfect.

you didnt understand what he meant

I hate Germans but at least you tried.

I lived in an autistic German enclave in Caracas before I walked into Texas. You all are bugs I swear. If some leader with a hat would say "das ist gut" for throwing babies into a combustion engine you would all just do it. I hate you Black folk

> If some leader with a hat would say "das ist gut" for throwing babies into a combustion engine you would all just do it.

Based. Collectivism always wins. ~~*Individualists*~~ seething.

Wouldn't it be the other way round?

i.e. Math is based on reality. Reality came first.

meaningless statement, unless you're suggesting there was a point where reality existed but there was no capacity for mathematics

it doesn't have to do with math. Musashi said that when you know the way broadly you see it in all things. And this is true. When you master something you will start to see it in other disciplines.

So what discipline did God pursue? Well its obviously creation as he is the creator. So other disciplines that are creative share elements with God and his creation. For me its literature that proved God was real and the author of history. There is a narrative structure to reality and it never fails to present itself. Archetypes are just how we percieve a greater underlying truth about the nature of reality. There are only so many ways stories can play out because there is only One Author.

I have a very similar outlook. I'm both a writer and programmer, so I can imagine God as both. As a programmer, I imagine God as having created reality as a "simulation" of sorts (not literally), where God allows things to play out and can change aspects of reality at will to see where it leads.

As a writer, I believe God to be writing the most complicated story of all, where the characters all have their own obstacles to overcome, their own demons to battle, their own character arcs to complete. And perhaps not everyone will make it, unfortunately.

"god" is just the name of the computer/ai/simulation we all exist in. this is why its all-knowing, all-present, all-powerful. it all fits together.

I sorta agree but also don't. God isn't the universe itself and the universe is not a simulation, it's real. But I understand why you see it that way and it's not like I can prove it either way

i didnt say "simulation" to mean its not real, i think its real too, just a simulation in the sense that someone has created it for specific purposes, and that there may be infinite others like it, doesnt make it any less real for us or for the ones who created it

yes. i also think it's "virtual" to the Creator, which is why He incarnated as Jesus in human form. Kind of like making a video game character in a video game because you can't enter the video game directly.

Why does it have to be a simulation? Why can't it be a geometry?

You may require a broader education base.

you're subjecting god to mathematical bullshit, which is art of the fallen

take your silly israelite worship elsewhere

God knows math better than anyone

>Why do americans struggle with basic maths?

why do you think americans struggle more than any other group

1

if you have zero apples zero times how many apples did you have?

you have one apple, because you got none no times means you got at least 1

holy frick, do people know this??? We could solve world hunger. All we have to do is realize we have no apples no times, and one will suddenly appear. Imagine the people we could feed, infinitely, forever!!!

Enjoy your drone probe

if you had no apples no times that means you had apples some times moron

zero apples zero times = 0 * 0 == 0^2. Try again.

Zero holocausts zero times equals losing 1/3 of your land.

no youre supposed to multiply the apple precisely zero times, not once

thats the only way to pull the apple from the æther

The nothing is not a something, therefore any operation with nothing is “not solvable” (our version of “undefined” because even if something is not solvable you still can define it otherwise, as in case of most operations with 0).

nope

the nothing becomes something with magic

>nothing becomes something with magic

I thought you needed Hellmann's mayo

But how many 0-apple groups do you have?

1

I don't have any apples

It's undefined. For convenience, it's often defined as 1.

x^0=1

therefore 0^0=1

Yes, but x^0=1 because number divided by itself equals 1. Thus x^b÷x^b=1, and as x^b÷x^b=x^(b-b)=x^0, x^0=1.

But you can't divide with a 0.

But you can't divide with a 0

Nothing = absence of everything, including physical laws. You cannot know how shit behaves in this extreme.

You also cannot know how 0 apples actually behave as currently 0 apples simply means that the information for building an apple in front of your stupid face is not available and instead there is an information to build it elsewhere, the fact that there is an actual level defining how physical shit behaves is simply presumed in basic maths, but it’s not available at the extreme nothing/0. So the correct answer to any operation with nothing/0 is not solvable.

WTF is say....4^-1?

WTF is 81^-2?

Negative exponents are divided rather than multiplied. Therefor

4^-1 = 1/4

81^-2 = 1/(81*81)

Partially the reason many American school students fail at higher math is because we get taught PEMDAS, which is often wrong. As an example what is the answer to

4/4/4

If you plug that into most calculators, you will get the wrong answer.

x^-y = 1/x^y

you CAN divide with a zero

just use a placeholder like with imaginary numbers, theres just no real point because it doesnt give you consistent results

What stupid Black person made this? It's not even "undefined" it's "indeterminate"

I think I remember my professors saying it’s 1 but I didn’t understand then and I don’t understand it now.

it means there are holes in the matrix through which you can manifest the physical from nothing

any number to the power of 0 is 1

>any number

Any number except 0

0^0 = n

0^(1-1) = n

0/0 = n

If n = 0 then 0^0 = 1 but also 0/0 =1 which can't happen

*If n = 1 then 0^0 = 1 but also 0/0 =1 which can't happen

Fixed

It's an indeterminate form. Same as infinity/infinity, 1^infinity, etc.

Horribly shit education system, it's intellectually handicapped us after getting progressively worse for 40 years.

That'll make the computer running our simulation crash.

ZERO AND ZERO

IS NOTHING BUT ZERO

the fabric of reality says shows that zero multiplied by zero zero times actually pulls a number out of the æther

math is magical

Remove the Black folk and rednecks and we're just as smart as any other white country.

Don't forget the foreign hispanics flooding our schools that can't even speak English fluently. Hard to teach people who don't speak the native language.

Strange how we have the lowest standardized test scores but have the highest rated higher education in the world. And as a side note, the reason Chinese are known for being good at math is because their national standardized testing is split into two parts, Mathematics and Comprehensive (everything else).

Now if you want to talk about a country with a really shitty education system, in India students protested when they weren't allowed to cheat on exams, which is why 95% of their tech graduates can't write code that will compile.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/09/india-tried-to-stop-cheating-in-school-so-half-a-million-students-just-skipped-exams/

>Why do americans struggle with basic maths?

I struggle with colonized britgays pluralizing math and saying shit like in hospital instead of the hospital.

0^0 = e^log(0^0) = e^(0*log(0)) = e^0 = 1

easy.

(Technically that's wrong cause log(0) is undefined but you can show that x*log(x) converges to zero if x goes to zero.)

The limit of the function f(x) = x^x is 1 as x goes to zero. The limit of the function f(x) = 0^x is 0 as x goes to 0.

It is what it is. In the end it's just a definition.

Yeah, which is why I said it was an indeterminate form (

). The definition you use depends on the context of how you're using 0^0.

undefined is a trick answer. It's bullshit

infinity times infinity is infinity

nothing times nothing is nothing

stop being moronic

That would be zero squared. Zero to the zeroeth power is just irrational gibberish.

They imported some cotton machinery 200 odd years ago which somehow gets counted into statistics.

If we look at the graph of x^x as x approaches 0, we can see that the value approaches 1. You can also do the following with your calculator:

>0.1^0.1 = 0.794...

>0.01^0.01 = 0.954...

>0.001^0.001 = 0.993...

>0.0001^0.0001 = 0.999...

>etc.

Obviously this is not the same as 0^0 as we're talking about limits, but since x^x approaches 1 as x approaches 0, it's useful in certain contexts to define 0^0 as being equal to 1. Saying that it's undefined/indeterminate is also fine, again depending on the context.

binomial coefficient proves it as 1, but I feel this is due to a misunderstanding in mathematics, but due to our current understanding of maths it proves to 1.

It's not math that is ever used for anything, our current understanding of math is the best approximiation we've been able to come up with so far, it has internal consistancy.

There are similar 'glitches in understanding' in other fields of science. For example, there are 2 stable forms of Hydrogen, meaning any atom that contains hydrogen doesn't have a freezing point but instead an "average freezing point" including water.

If you believe 0^0=1, Satan is going to rape you in hell.

Undefined Black folk

>Undefined Black folk

Yes, 0^0 is undefined

it's not 1 because anything multiplied by 0 is 0

(* Importing necessary libraries *)

Require Import Arith.

Require Import Lia.

Set Printing All.

(* Define the power function, which maps (0,0) to 0 instead of the conventional 1 *)

Fixpoint pow (a n : nat) : nat :=

match n with

| 0 => match a with

| 0 => 0

| _ => 1

end

| S n' => a * pow a n'

end.

(* State the theorem that 0^0 is not equal to 1 *)

Theorem zero_power_zero_not_one : pow 0 0 <> 1.

Proof.

unfold pow.

discriminate.

Qed.

never 0, usually 1, sometimes undefined

but yeah, math isn't as strict as people believe it is

Benson 1999 "The choice whether to define 0^0 is based on convenience, not on correctness. If we refrain from defining 0^0, then certain assertions become unnecessarily awkward. ... The consensus is to use the definition 0^0 = 1, although there are textbooks that refrain from defining 0^0."

AKA math homosexuals are lazy and define literally incorrect statements as true because they feel like it because it makes math easier.

it's cope for literal morons in mathematics and the fact of the incompleteness

prove it's 1

>fun fact: you can't

it's defined as 1 because you're lazy and can't be bothered to develop theorems that work for all natural numbers, saying shit like 0^0=1 is literal math cope

>prove it's 1

>>fun fact: you can't

what part of "math isn't as strict as people believe it is" did you not understand?

What part of you can't prove 0^0 = 1 do you not understand?

What part of incompleteness do you not understand?

defining it as such is math cope.

>mathematics morons: 0^1 = 0 but 0^0 = 1

let me define what the frick ever i want when it suits me,

>muh calculus of indeterminate forms

>What part of incompleteness do you not understand?

that's literally what I'm hinting at, you illiterate serf

I said that because you ignored the incompleteness fact in my original post and you postured, acting like you knew something that i didn't.

>"^1" means nothing moron

wrong. exponentiation is an operation involving two numbers: the base and exponent. it's defined by b^n, where b is the base and n is the power; when n is a POSITIVE integer, aka 1+m where m is a natural number, exponentiation corresponds to repeated multiplication of the base: b^n is the product of multiplying n bases.

aka raising to the power of 1 means something, like (1^1 == 1*1 = 1), (2^1== 2*1 ==2), (3^1== 3*1 ==3)

you know nothing and are moronic.

>you postured

you are incredibly insecure. i never hid anything, i flat out stated that math isn't as strict as people believe. you're just an imbecile with a chip on his shoulder.

I mean, you're the one who responded claiming i didn't understand incompleteness when I literally said it in the same post.

you're the one with the lazy chip on your shoulder. you need to learn to do calculus of indeterminate forms without defining 0^0=1

>claiming i didn't understand incompleteness

quote me, moron

>HURDUR what part of "math isn't as strict as people believe it is" did you not understand?

fricking pesud, who can't even remember what he said. you are literally saying i don't understand that math isn't strict, aka that it is incomplete.

math isn't strict == math is incomplete.

>you are literally saying i don't understand

that's not at all what i meant. i meant that you did not read my post correctly and that when you challenged me to "prove that it's 1" you misunderstood my post

>that's not at all what i meant.

say what you mean then because you just come off as not understanding English.

if you meant I did not read my post correctly, you could have been direct, instead you postured like a fricking moron.

you couldn't even be bother to mention e^0 = 1. that's all you had to say and you would have been respected, but instead you're dumb as frick and can't even into limits

>you just come off as not understanding English

>you could have been direct

this has to be trolling, you can't be serious at this point. absolute fricking moron, get your head checked for brain damage

it's hilarious to me that dutch are shamelessly direct and honest, and americans are shamelessly indirect and dishonest.

it makes for great entertainment to any outsider who is well-versed in both cultures.

>wrong.

it literally means "no change", like adding zero or multiplying by 1. why do you expect 0 to change into something when you purposely output the same thing you input?

morons: 0^1 = 0

"^1" means nothing moron, you just wrote 0=0 and you are surprised by that?

>let me define what the frick ever i want when it suits me,

this but unironically.

0 to 0 is 1, as you approach its graph from both sides its 1, so it has to be 1 in the middle too

any other answer is onions NU-math that should be discarded

>m-muh exceptions!!!!!!!

1^1 = 1

0.1^0.1 = 0.794...

0.01^0.01 = 0.954...

Etc.

0.000001^0.000001 = 0.999...

Then :

lim 0^0 = 1-

If you have nothing, you cant do anything' ,That is a real world understanding of ZERO

Only an idiot would want to express this insanity of being able to do something to nothing as MATHS

OP is a homosexual

If you take the limit of x^0 as x goes to 0 from the right, it equals to 1.

If you take the limit of 0^x as x goes to 0 from the right, it equals to 0.

These two limits try to find what 0^0 equates to, and they are different. The expression is undefined. Easy peasy. Git gud, learn calculus.

it equals 1

Dysgenic fertility has always been America's Greatest Strength. ☮