Which of these sockets are in the right place? (If any)

[SUNRAY]

As he wrote, a "decimal fraction". Are you not familiar with that term?

I know what a decimal fraction is, but sadly far too many don't and I was trying to establish if it's a trick question, with a trick question, and at what stage of corruption the trick is.

 

[morqthana]

Please explain what I have forgotten.

You seem to have forgotten that there is a

very significant difference between square inches and inches squared

Despite agreeing with everything I wrote about the 2 x 2 example, you seem to think that because all the evaluations, no matter what the order of the words, are the same when the values are 1, they are the same when the values are not 1.

And that isn't true, because there is a

very significant difference between square inches and inches squared

This shape is 4 squared, cm. OR 4² cm.

4² cm is 16cm. It is a linear measurement.

which is also 16, cm squared.

No, 4² cm is 16cm, not 16 cm squared.

OR 16 cm². Also known as 16, square cm.

No.

"16 cm squared" could be a linear measurement of 256cm. e.g. "How long is that line?" "It's 16 cm squared"

Or it could be an area of 256 square centimeters (which is written 256cm²). e.g. "What's the area of that piece of wood?" "It's 16 cm squared".

But it could never be 16 square centimeters.

 

[morqthana]

Are you looking for a decimal or a fraction?

I want a decimal fraction. As opposed to a vulgar one.

 

[morqthana]

I was taught never to use expressions like that since (as I presume is the reason for you posting it), it is so easily misinterpreted, since "a hundred thousandths" and "a hundred thousandth" are so similar.

And what of (which would have been next)

"two hundred thousandths"

?

 

[morqthana]

Don't understand English either thenView attachment 385913

Of course I do.

And the fact that one can say "three squared" does not mean that

there is such a term as "a squared centimeter".

However I don't understand why you are making this even more confused.

That's not my intention.

What I'm trying to do is to get you to dissociate the name for a particular geometric shape, the way that the length/width of a particular geometric shape can be specified, the mathematical process used to arrive at the area of that shape, and the units of measure used for area.

 

[SUNRAY]

What I'm trying to do is to get you to dissociate the name for a particular geometric shape, the way that the length/width of a particular geometric shape can be specified, the mathematical process used to arrive at the area of that shape, and the units of measure used for area.

Why when I have an excellent understanding of areas and the vagueries (or vagaries depending on ones eduacatio) of the terminologies in place.

 

[opps]

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, but what is a decimal fraction?

And I say this as someone who studied partial derivatives whilst at uni.

 

[SUNRAY]

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, but what is a decimal fraction?

And I say this as someone who studied partial derivatives whilst at uni.

Oh boy! here comes a plethora of different definitions from don't exist to anything you care to describe.

 

[morqthana]

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, but what is a decimal fraction?

Decimal: 0.25, vulgar ¼

0.5 ½

0.75 ¾

You get the idea...

Decimal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fraction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[JohnW2]

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, but what is a decimal fraction? ... And I say this as someone who studied partial derivatives whilst at uni.

So did I - but what you didn't seem to learn at uni was that "fraction" merely means "non-integer" and, as morqthana and myself have said, such a value can be expressed as either a "decimal fraction" or a "vulgar fraction" (sometimes called a 'simple fraction'), the latter being one integer 'over' another

 

[morqthana]

Why when I have an excellent understanding of areas and the vaguaries (or vagaries depending on ones eduacatio) of the terminologies in place.

What sort of education teaches you that there is a word "vaguary"?

And I'm not sure that the "terminologies in place" are subject to whims, or unpredictability.

But as for why - because you don't seem able to separate "square/squared" when it's used to describe a shape:

"The rug is 5' square"

and when it's used as a unit of area:

"A football pitch is typically 6,500 - 7,000 square metres"

and when it's a mathematical operation

x²=y²+z²

 

[ebee]

I think you need to seriously re-consider your arithmetic in relation to "6 dozen dozen"

To be fair, when it`s written it is easier to see the difference, cancel the dozens out in each side and you are left to compare a half against 6, a factor of 12 magnitude.
Spoken only and the mind tells you a half a dozen is 6 and you compare that with the six and mistakenly remember two "dozen dozen" remaining when in reality only one of the dozens in one of the sides is remaining compared to the other still having both dozens.

Harry will not be the only one to fall for it written but a lot more fall for it if it is verbal only.

 

[JohnW2]

To be fair, when it`s written it is easier to see the difference, cancel the dozens out in each side and you are left to compare a half against 6, a factor of 12 magnitude.

Yes, but one can't (shouldn't) do that, since the first "dozen" (in conjunction with what preceded it) has a different meaning in the two expressions - so that one cannot cancel both of the dozens in the two expressions. In the first case, the "6 dozen" equates to 72, whereas in the second case "half a dozen" equates to 6. The comparison of your two expressions is therefore between .,..
72 dozen
and
6 dozen

Harry will not be the only one to fall for it written but a lot more fall for it if it is verbal only.

I'm not sure how Harry came to his conclusion, but he did not 'fall for it' in the sense you describe above, since he said that he thought that both your statements equated to the same number (72)

"Which is greater, six dozen dozen or half a dozen dozen?" and a lot of people got it wrong.

I hope we are agreed that the first of your two statements (6 dozen dozen) results in the (much) greater answer. However, whilst you say that a lot of people "get that wrong" I struggle to see how any interpretation, or any way of thinking (including the 'erroneous approach' you mention above) could result in someone concluding that "half a dozen" was the greater. What am I missing?

 

[SUNRAY]

What sort of education teaches you that there is a word "vaguary"?

Apologies for the typo, corrected

And I'm not sure that the "terminologies in place" are subject to whims, or unpredictability.

Isn't that what much of this is about? Why else has there been dispute?

But as for why - because you don't seem able to separate "square/squared" when it's used to describe a shape:

I thought this was more about describing area than shape. I have no difficulty in understanding squared as the past tense of square, why do you?

"The rug is 5' square"

Sorry but I'm not quite sure you meant to write: second(s) The rug is 5minutes square second(s)
What was it you were saying about: And I'm not sure that the "terminologies in place" are subject to whims, or unpredictability.

I'll assume (despite the common phrase: To assume makes an ass of u and me) that your intention is:
The rug is 5 feet square which works out as 25 square feet (also 25 squared feet) abreviated as 25ft²

and when it's used as a unit of area:

"A football pitch is typically 6,500 - 7,000 square metres"

A bit small but yes I agree 70,000 metres squared or 70,000m² is sufficient. However 70,000 metres square would be rather excessive
Ditto regarding: And I'm not sure that the "terminologies in place" are subject to whims, or unpredictability.

and when it's a mathematical operation

x²=y²+z²

No dispute from me that: x times x = y times y plus z times z which is the same as x squared = y squared plus z squared.

 

[JohnW2]

Sorry but I'm not quite sure you meant to write: second(s) The rug is 5minutes square second(s)

Eh?! Is this deliberate silliness intended to make some point?

The 'double quote mark' (") which you appear to be interpreting as 'seconds' is one of a pair surrounding the entire text, and you also appear to be interpreting the single quote mark/apostrophe (') as 'minutes' - but you surely must indicate that (particularly in relation to shape/objects) the ' and " symbols are also very widely used (much more than for units of time) to indicate feet and inches?