How much math do youreally need?

[eddie]

the first statement. "women are time and money" 'And' without any modifier implies summation. Women = Time + Money. If you make the initial statement more precise like "women (or girlfriends/wives so on) are the product of time and money" then it works.

+1 to what ArkhamAsylum said. quick but accurate estimation of various simple problems is what one encounters most often in the cockpit.

For the first time I noticed that discrepancy as I posted. It gave me pause.

[pause]

Then I decided that "x and y are" would never be a mathematical expression. "X and Y IS women," and I think you've got me...

In other words, "Women are time and money," is a description of the expression, "time * money = women," not the expression itself.

 

[phrogpilot73]

Did you see my second post? My whole point was that the original equation should be women =time+money (not time*money), which would then lead women = 2money.

If you say x=a and b, then x=a+b.

And again, you would be wrong. In order to ADD something, they must be of the same unit. Time and money are separate units, therefore must be multiplied. So, women = time * money, not time + money.

 

[Nafod]

For the first time I noticed that discrepancy as I posted. It gave me pause.

[pause]

Then I decided that "x and y are" would never be a mathematical expression. "X and Y IS women," and I think you've got me...

In other words, "Women are time and money," is a description of the expression, "time * money = women," not the expression itself.

no. "Woman are time and money" is a description of the expression "women = time + money". are and is just mean equals.

the thing could be corrected if the original statement said 'women are the product of time and money'. *that* is a description of the expression "women = time (money)

i guess you could get into other logic based arguments like 'girls are made of sugar and spice' or something as well...

 

[Scoob]

Oh for Chrissakes!!!

You're all wrong. Everyone knows women are crazy, not evil.

 

[fresh]

You're all wrong. Everyone knows women are crazy, AND evil.
__________________

there... fixed it for you....

 

[Scoob]

there... fixed it for you....

Nice.

From now on, Scoob will be outsourcing all his posts.

 

[bunk22]

It's not so much the advanced math that you need, but they want you to have the analytic, problem-solving skills you will need to do your job and lead others well.

How would you know? Have to have been there done that to make this call I think. It's not necessarily math you need to know but numbers and letters.

 

[Raptor2216]

For one thing, time = money would lead to 2(money), not money squared.

Stop being all nerdy...its funny so just accept it.

 

[villanelle]

Stop being all nerdy...its funny so just accept it.

Not that you aren't totally correct, but why did I get called out?! I was certainly not alone in my nerdiness! :icon_tong

 

[Nafod]

yeah you were, you totally were dude!

 

[FMRAM]

Anyone see the algebra solver software ad at the top of the page?

 

[Himbo]

I feel like I am thread jacking by going back to the subject now. FYI, I had not taken any real math in over 15 years when I started with the Navy. I didn't even take any refresher courses. All of the math I have needed in my career so far has had some form of a quick "cheater" method and nothing has been hard. As mentioned before, you just need to be quick and accurate in whatever you are doing. One of my favorite sayings came from an old Skipper of mine briefing my class; "There is always someone dumber than YOU that has made it through Flight School." Now I am going to go polish my NFO wings and glasses, put on my pocket pen protector, and continue on pretending that I am good at math. :icon_smil

 

[BACONATOR]

I hate you all. The bottom line is that the person who wrote that joke was probably in highschool or something and probably didn't know a THING about Boolean algebra (ie: mathematical logic functions) such as AND, OR, XOR, NAND, NOT etc etc. So when he wrote time AND money, he meant it in its dictionary meaning, not its boolean operator function. If he meant it as a boolean operator, he would have WRITTEN the equation accordingly.

The drawing is correct, albeit with a poorly written caption.

Oh, and mental math in the cockpit is all based on time/speed and distance calculations which are based on 60 and 10 accordingly. As long as you can work those multiples, you should be fine.

In reality, you'll be doing a lot of multiples of 10, 20, 30, and 60. Approximation is your friend. From time to time you may do some weird multiplication (like 3.5 correction factor for tacan holding, but whatever). Math isn't hard in the plane. Not sucking at flying is hard.

 

[JIMC5499]

Did anybody notify Masterbates of this discussion? I would like to see his solution to this math problem.

 

[Gatordev]

From time to time you may do some weird multiplication (like 3.5 correction factor for tacan holding, but whatever).

And even that is a waste of time (in more ways than one, but I digress). If I'm five radials off and the correction factor is 3.5, I'd say the answer is somewhere between 15 and 20 and call it a day. As long as a stud could tell me how to do it and then flew something close, I was happy. It's not like you can fly 17.5 degrees the whole time, anyway.