Homework help

[Razorvich]

Year 7 mathematics.

• How many trains can you make a length of one?
• How many trains can you make a length of two?
• How many trains can you make a length of three?
• How many trains can you make a length of five?
• How many trains can you make a length of six?
• How many trains can you make a length of zero?

Look at the table of values and find a pattern in the number of different trains possible column.
Is there a relationship between the length of train and the number of different trains possible?

Represent the relationship as an equasion by using variable "L" as the length of the the train and the variable "N" as the number of trains possible.

How quick can you work it out?..

[Thorthoth]

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

[Dukasaur]

Ask pimpdave. He seems to be doing a lot of homework lately.

[Bernie Sanders]

Did I go color blind? Where's the yellow rectangles and green squares?

Fuk this, I'll wait for Karel to solve this

[Thorthoth]

I already solved it, you idiots.
Just follow the formula I posted.

[jfm10]

2+2
1+1+2
1+2+1
2+1+1
1+1+1+1

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

[Symmetry]

Represent the relationship as an equasion by using variable "L" as the length of the the train and the variable "N" as the number of trains possible.

2+2
1+1+2
1+2+1
2+1+1
1+1+1+1

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

You both fail.

[Thorthoth]

Represent the relationship as an equasion by using variable "L" as the length of the the train and the variable "N" as the number of trains possible.

2+2
1+1+2
1+2+1
2+1+1
1+1+1+1

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

You both fail.

No you fail for coming in just to be your idiot troll self. Cllearly you can do no better since you did no better.My math is correct and my notation is fine considering the limits of available text option in the forums (no subscripts or superscripts).

[Symmetry]

Represent the relationship as an equasion by using variable "L" as the length of the the train and the variable "N" as the number of trains possible.

2+2
1+1+2
1+2+1
2+1+1
1+1+1+1

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

Fibonacci Sequence.
N(l) = (N(l)-1) + (N(l)-2)

You both fail.

No you fail for coming in just to be your idiot troll self. Cllearly you can do no better since you did no better.My math is correct and my notation is fine considering the limits of available text option in the forums (no subscripts or superscripts).

"L" is neither subscript nor superscript, and was a requirement.

Read the question next time, Thorth.

[Thorthoth]

Rolling. On. The. Floor. Laughing.

Symbot, a mediocre English teacher (that confuses 'past' with 'passed'...) can only contribute to a mathematical thread by trying to 'critique' the formula notation.

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.
YOU need not concern yourself with it.

[CatchersMitt14]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

[Symmetry]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

This is exactly the case.

Thorth- attack me all you want, but you're simply wrong. You didn't read the question properly, and you didn't answer in the format it required.

[Thorthoth]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

This is exactly the case.

Thorth- attack me all you want, but you're simply wrong. You didn't read the question properly, and you didn't answer in the format it required.

Nonsense... and since I'm most fortunately not in your class and being taught graded by your pedantic hack self, I hardly need to worry about it.

[Symmetry]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

This is exactly the case.

Thorth- attack me all you want, but you're simply wrong. You didn't read the question properly, and you didn't answer in the format it required.

Nonsense... and since I'm most fortunately not in your class and being taught graded by your pedantic hack self, I hardly need to worry about it.

You'd also lose marks in an English class if you didn't know the difference between "l" and "L".

[Thorthoth]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

No, the use of 'L' and 'l' as separate variables is entirely context dependent. I put no store in your post-hoc definitions.

[Thorthoth]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

No, the use of 'L' and 'l' as separate variables is entirely context dependent. I put no store in your post-hoc definitions.

Nonsense, but anyway-

The question asked you to use "L".

Read the question, Thorth. I don't have to be a teacher to tell you that, but it is a very basic piece of advice that I remind all of my students of when they take exams.

Argue all you want, but you failed.

Dodge, bluff and distract from the real issue of import. This is what you always do when your incompetence becomes evident, Sym.

[Symmetry]

I deleted that post for a reason- this argument is becoming circular when it should have ended. I have nothing more to add other than you're wrong, and it's been explained to you why you're wrong.

[CatchersMitt14]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

No, the use of 'L' and 'l' as separate variables is entirely context dependent. I put no store in your post-hoc definitions.

Lol, dependent on what? I'd really like to see an example of them being interchangeable. I've spent copious hours buried in equations and this is not a phenomenon of which I am familiar. Typically the variables such as 'L' and 'l' will be related to each other with their meaning, but not the same thing.

[Symmetry]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

No, the use of 'L' and 'l' as separate variables is entirely context dependent. I put no store in your post-hoc definitions.

Lol, dependent on what? I'd really like to see an example of them being interchangeable. I've spent copious hours buried in equations and this is not a phenomenon of which I am familiar. Typically the variables such as 'L' and 'l' will be related to each other with their meaning, but not the same thing.

Indeed, and a lower case "l" will usually be stylised if used at all. It's a confusing letter to use when clear meaning is important.

[Thorthoth]

Never mind that the notation options are limited, and further never mind that 'L' an 'l' are different cases of the same letter.

People who can do basic math (...or 'maths'). know what I'm talking about.

People who know basic math would know that 'L' and 'l' are their own variables and therefore not interchangeable in any formula.

No, the use of 'L' and 'l' as separate variables is entirely context dependent. I put no store in your post-hoc definitions.

Lol, dependent on what? I'd really like to see an example of them being interchangeable. I've spent copious hours buried in equations and this is not a phenomenon of which I am familiar. Typically the variables such as 'L' and 'l' will be related to each other with their meaning, but not the same thing.

Indeed, and a lower case "l" will usually be stylised if used at all. It's a confusing letter to use when clear meaning is important.

Like I said before, somebody who is familiar with basic math will not require such hand holding when encountering a basic formula such as that of Fibonacci.