"proportional"
G Patel
In middle school I was taught that protionality refers to a relation
between ratios.
eg: 1:2 is proportional to 2:4
eg: the dimensions of this drawing is proportional to the actual
object
In algebra, it seems we use proptional to mean the ratio itself.
If x/y is constant ratio, we say x is propotional to y (x alpha y).
Or x = ky, where k is a proportionality constant.
Why do we use 'propotional' when referring to ratios in algebra
(instead of reserving it for a relation between ratios) ?
mathman
William Elliot
Otherwise all contexts are removed from my view,
the flow of thought disrupted and chaos reigns.
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#quote
In particular for Google users:
Instead of simply hitting the prominent "Reply" link, which doesn't
include a copy of the post to which one is replying, click the "Show
Options" link (toward the top of an item in the thread), which causes
a shaded area of links to appear next to the top of the item, including
"Reply" (first) that does introduce a copy of the previous text (offset
by > signs in the usual fashion).
matt271...@yahoo.co.uk
William Elliot wrote:
> Reply only if adequate context is included _within_ the reply.
> Otherwise all contexts are removed from my view,
> the flow of thought disrupted and chaos reigns.
> http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#quote
>
> In particular for Google users:
>
> Instead of simply hitting the prominent "Reply" link, which doesn't
> include a copy of the post to which one is replying
It does now. They have fixed it.
William Elliot
right, which sigh, Google has become.
They still haven't fixed the index into a thread which wasn't broken
until they became hyper-commercial stock traded corporate trash.
My advise to them: Updates are worse than blind dates.
Anyway, if quoting is fixed, then why is mathmaniaman unable to ever
include any context?
mensa...@aol.com
Maybe he deletes it?
Dave L. Renfro
> Anyway, if quoting is fixed, then why is mathmaniaman
> unable to ever include any context?
According to google's "Show original" format (URL below),
it appears that mathman is posting through The Math Forum.
I use Math Forum for some other groups (non-Usenet), and
thus I happen to know that you need to do something extra
in order to get the original message quoted. [I never
bother, since I always prepare my posts on a desktop text
editor first. I do this because several times over the years
I've lost all the text of a well crafted post due to a power
disruption, a problem with my post not getting through for
some reason (and not being able to return to the text by
using the "back" button), etc.] I often find myself scratching
my head when people post without context, but maybe this is
the (former) teacher in me who was always trying to anticipate
how someone could misunderstand me, or perhaps it's the former
student in me who was always concerned about the possibility
of losing points simply because I didn't make my answers and
supporting work sufficiently clear.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/c0473c9202a9d017?dmode=source
Dave L. Renfro
William Elliot
> William Elliot wrote (in part):
>
> > Anyway, if quoting is fixed, then why is mathmaniaman
> > unable to ever include any context?
>
> According to google's "Show original" format (URL below), it appears
> that mathman is posting through The Math Forum. I use Math Forum for
> some other groups (non-Usenet), and thus I happen to know that you need
> to do something extra in order to get the original message quoted. [I
> never bother, since I always prepare my posts on a desktop text editor
I frequently do the same for those that require thinking thoughtful
thoughts.
> first. I do this because several times over the years I've lost all the
> text of a well crafted post due to a power disruption, a problem with my
> post not getting through for some reason (and not being able to return
> to the text by using the "back" button), etc.]
> I often find myself scratching my head when people post without context,
> but maybe this is the (former) teacher in me who was always trying to
> anticipate how someone could misunderstand me, or perhaps it's the
> former student in me who was always concerned about the possibility of
> losing points simply because I didn't make my answers and supporting
> work sufficiently clear.
I don't let those fleas cause me to itch. If they don't include context,
then, instead of reconstructing the thread and making quality reply I wing
it with what I remember, which for math quickly become gibberish because
details often aren't remembered accurately. I do think mathman has
contribution to make to this group, but as he never includes context, I
skip over his replies instead of reviewing and perhaps adding comment.
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/c0473c9202a9d017?dmode=source
>
> Dave L. Renfro
>
Thanks David. Maybe mathman will come to understand why to quote.
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#quote
Can you give him instructions how to quote from Mathforum?
Stephen J. Herschkorn
You have clearly taken as your repsonsibility the correction of every
violation of what you find to be acceptable netiquette here. In return,
could you please at least modify the subject line (as I have done) when
you do so? That way, those of us who are here to read about
mathematics don't have to bother reading your tirades. Personally, I
find your failure to notify us of the change of topic much more
irritating than the subject of any of your complaints.
--
Stephen J. Herschkorn sjher...@netscape.net
Math Tutor on the Internet and in Central New Jersey and Manhattan