Iguana posted:
Stormborn posted:
Iguana posted:

Here's a lil test fuh you smart man. Meh tables pon de exercise book seh 16 ounces in a pound. I memorize it and get a star pon meh common entrance. Now how about you "logically illustrate how I came up with the answer" or "knowing why it is right".

Tek yuh time. Feel free to reach out to yuh klansman fren and he excel macros if need be. Or phone NASA. And of course yuh good friends - GOOGLE or Cliffs notes.

Ah waiting fuh yuh "illustration" beyond "pedagogy and rote memory".

You are a dunce it is clear from above. I hardly care to engage you since nothing from you would ever be illuminating.

LMFAO, you "hardly care to engage" eh punk? The only DUNCE here is you! Given the chance to demonstrate what you preached, you slink away like the duncified goat you are!

You spent upwards of 4 pages arguing that memorization of a table of weights and measures was the domain of dunces. You then tek a BIG step into addled brain confusion of units of weights and measures with mathematical formulas, informing all of the obvious - that formulas need to be understood and not just repeated!

Then yuh heartily accuse Gwana man of being a "dunce" and "mathematically handicapped" and couldn't show "how it is right" because po Gwana man keep sehing de tings he "memorize" was units of weights and measures, which weren't mathematical formulae at all!

Now given the chance to show us how 16 ounces mek a pound (units of weights and measures) "is right", a chance to "logically illustrate" how they came to this conclusion, you run buckta-less from the scene of wan giant accident you created!

Reality finally hit yuh vacuous head that units of weights and measures are not mathematical formulas, thus they cannot be "worked out", "logically illustrated" to show how one "came up with the answer", other than a decision hundreds of years ago that the unit of measure was so. Even with the help of yuh frens Google and Cliff Notes you couldn't "solve" it, eh?

Banna, stop talking pure skont and engaging in discussions you know little to nothing about. You are a fraud with a compulsive need to be noticed and applauded!

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

stormborn is a real head case bai . . . but he is wan hard-working ACTOR

smfh

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

Banna, relax!  Try not memorizing the 10 opinions a CPA can issue after an audit, you never pass the CPA exam!

ronan posted:
Iguana posted:
Stormborn posted:
Iguana posted:

Here's a lil test fuh you smart man. Meh tables pon de exercise book seh 16 ounces in a pound. I memorize it and get a star pon meh common entrance. Now how about you "logically illustrate how I came up with the answer" or "knowing why it is right".

Tek yuh time. Feel free to reach out to yuh klansman fren and he excel macros if need be. Or phone NASA. And of course yuh good friends - GOOGLE or Cliffs notes.

Ah waiting fuh yuh "illustration" beyond "pedagogy and rote memory".

You are a dunce it is clear from above. I hardly care to engage you since nothing from you would ever be illuminating.

LMFAO, you "hardly care to engage" eh punk? The only DUNCE here is you! Given the chance to demonstrate what you preached, you slink away like the duncified goat you are!

You spent upwards of 4 pages arguing that memorization of a table of weights and measures was the domain of dunces. You then tek a BIG step into addled brain confusion of units of weights and measures with mathematical formulas, informing all of the obvious - that formulas need to be understood and not just repeated!

Then yuh heartily accuse Gwana man of being a "dunce" and "mathematically handicapped" and couldn't show "how it is right" because po Gwana man keep sehing de tings he "memorize" was units of weights and measures, which weren't mathematical formulae at all!

Now given the chance to show us how 16 ounces mek a pound (units of weights and measures) "is right", a chance to "logically illustrate" how they came to this conclusion, you run buckta-less from the scene of wan giant accident you created!

Reality finally hit yuh vacuous head that units of weights and measures are not mathematical formulas, thus they cannot be "worked out", "logically illustrated" to show how one "came up with the answer", other than a decision hundreds of years ago that the unit of measure was so. Even with the help of yuh frens Google and Cliff Notes you couldn't "solve" it, eh?

Banna, stop talking pure skont and engaging in discussions you know little to nothing about. You are a fraud with a compulsive need to be noticed and applauded!

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

stormborn is a real head case bai . . . but he is wan hard-working ACTOR

smfh

"Constants" are the standard values used in calculations.

ronan posted:
Iguana posted:
Stormborn posted:
Iguana posted:

Here's a lil test fuh you smart man. Meh tables pon de exercise book seh 16 ounces in a pound. I memorize it and get a star pon meh common entrance. Now how about you "logically illustrate how I came up with the answer" or "knowing why it is right".

Tek yuh time. Feel free to reach out to yuh klansman fren and he excel macros if need be. Or phone NASA. And of course yuh good friends - GOOGLE or Cliffs notes.

Ah waiting fuh yuh "illustration" beyond "pedagogy and rote memory".

You are a dunce it is clear from above. I hardly care to engage you since nothing from you would ever be illuminating.

LMFAO, you "hardly care to engage" eh punk? The only DUNCE here is you! Given the chance to demonstrate what you preached, you slink away like the duncified goat you are!

You spent upwards of 4 pages arguing that memorization of a table of weights and measures was the domain of dunces. You then tek a BIG step into addled brain confusion of units of weights and measures with mathematical formulas, informing all of the obvious - that formulas need to be understood and not just repeated!

Then yuh heartily accuse Gwana man of being a "dunce" and "mathematically handicapped" and couldn't show "how it is right" because po Gwana man keep sehing de tings he "memorize" was units of weights and measures, which weren't mathematical formulae at all!

Now given the chance to show us how 16 ounces mek a pound (units of weights and measures) "is right", a chance to "logically illustrate" how they came to this conclusion, you run buckta-less from the scene of wan giant accident you created!

Reality finally hit yuh vacuous head that units of weights and measures are not mathematical formulas, thus they cannot be "worked out", "logically illustrated" to show how one "came up with the answer", other than a decision hundreds of years ago that the unit of measure was so. Even with the help of yuh frens Google and Cliff Notes you couldn't "solve" it, eh?

Banna, stop talking pure skont and engaging in discussions you know little to nothing about. You are a fraud with a compulsive need to be noticed and applauded!

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

smfh

I know you are talking to me via Iquana's post so let me help your communication. All weights and measure are defined arbitrarily on some assigned property of material or thing. Indeed they are custom and practice but defined custom and practice and  the assigned values are worked out ie derived  from their frames of reference! And who is denying that the use of tables?

seignet posted:
ronan posted:
Iguana posted:
Stormborn posted:
Iguana posted:

Here's a lil test fuh you smart man. Meh tables pon de exercise book seh 16 ounces in a pound. I memorize it and get a star pon meh common entrance. Now how about you "logically illustrate how I came up with the answer" or "knowing why it is right".

Tek yuh time. Feel free to reach out to yuh klansman fren and he excel macros if need be. Or phone NASA. And of course yuh good friends - GOOGLE or Cliffs notes.

Ah waiting fuh yuh "illustration" beyond "pedagogy and rote memory".

You are a dunce it is clear from above. I hardly care to engage you since nothing from you would ever be illuminating.

LMFAO, you "hardly care to engage" eh punk? The only DUNCE here is you! Given the chance to demonstrate what you preached, you slink away like the duncified goat you are!

You spent upwards of 4 pages arguing that memorization of a table of weights and measures was the domain of dunces. You then tek a BIG step into addled brain confusion of units of weights and measures with mathematical formulas, informing all of the obvious - that formulas need to be understood and not just repeated!

Then yuh heartily accuse Gwana man of being a "dunce" and "mathematically handicapped" and couldn't show "how it is right" because po Gwana man keep sehing de tings he "memorize" was units of weights and measures, which weren't mathematical formulae at all!

Now given the chance to show us how 16 ounces mek a pound (units of weights and measures) "is right", a chance to "logically illustrate" how they came to this conclusion, you run buckta-less from the scene of wan giant accident you created!

Reality finally hit yuh vacuous head that units of weights and measures are not mathematical formulas, thus they cannot be "worked out", "logically illustrated" to show how one "came up with the answer", other than a decision hundreds of years ago that the unit of measure was so. Even with the help of yuh frens Google and Cliff Notes you couldn't "solve" it, eh?

Banna, stop talking pure skont and engaging in discussions you know little to nothing about. You are a fraud with a compulsive need to be noticed and applauded!

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

stormborn is a real head case bai . . . but he is wan hard-working ACTOR

smfh

"Constants" are the standard values used in calculations.

the values are derived from from constants, planks constant, frequency of cesium, speed of light for kg, sec and meter which are fundamental measures in SI

seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

fake issue sir . . . not a matter in dispute

there are no "principles" involved in foot, yard, inch, pound, miles, furlongs, pint, etc., measurements

Baseman posted:
seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

Banna, relax!  Try not memorizing the 10 opinions a CPA can issue after an audit, you never pass the CPA exam!

I guess science is another discipline. Accountants are good at masturbation. The more the numbers are massaged the bigger it grows.

Stormborn posted:
seignet posted:
ronan posted:
Iguana posted:
Stormborn posted:
Iguana posted:

Here's a lil test fuh you smart man. Meh tables pon de exercise book seh 16 ounces in a pound. I memorize it and get a star pon meh common entrance. Now how about you "logically illustrate how I came up with the answer" or "knowing why it is right".

Tek yuh time. Feel free to reach out to yuh klansman fren and he excel macros if need be. Or phone NASA. And of course yuh good friends - GOOGLE or Cliffs notes.

Ah waiting fuh yuh "illustration" beyond "pedagogy and rote memory".

You are a dunce it is clear from above. I hardly care to engage you since nothing from you would ever be illuminating.

LMFAO, you "hardly care to engage" eh punk? The only DUNCE here is you! Given the chance to demonstrate what you preached, you slink away like the duncified goat you are!

You spent upwards of 4 pages arguing that memorization of a table of weights and measures was the domain of dunces. You then tek a BIG step into addled brain confusion of units of weights and measures with mathematical formulas, informing all of the obvious - that formulas need to be understood and not just repeated!

Then yuh heartily accuse Gwana man of being a "dunce" and "mathematically handicapped" and couldn't show "how it is right" because po Gwana man keep sehing de tings he "memorize" was units of weights and measures, which weren't mathematical formulae at all!

Now given the chance to show us how 16 ounces mek a pound (units of weights and measures) "is right", a chance to "logically illustrate" how they came to this conclusion, you run buckta-less from the scene of wan giant accident you created!

Reality finally hit yuh vacuous head that units of weights and measures are not mathematical formulas, thus they cannot be "worked out", "logically illustrated" to show how one "came up with the answer", other than a decision hundreds of years ago that the unit of measure was so. Even with the help of yuh frens Google and Cliff Notes you couldn't "solve" it, eh?

Banna, stop talking pure skont and engaging in discussions you know little to nothing about. You are a fraud with a compulsive need to be noticed and applauded!

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

stormborn is a real head case bai . . . but he is wan hard-working ACTOR

smfh

"Constants" are the standard values used in calculations.

the values are derived from from constants, planks constant, frequency of cesium, speed of light for kg, sec and meter which are fundamental measures in SI

experiments until a value repeats continuously then it is a constant. 

ronan posted:
seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

fake issue sir . . . not a matter in dispute

there are no "principles" involved in foot, yard, inch, pound, miles, furlongs, pint, etc., measurements

There has to be principle involved, dem can juss pull dem constants out of the air. Dem englishmen are thorough ppl.

Baseman posted:
Stormborn posted:
Baseman posted:

You caused this shit!!

Hope you learned something rather than relying on the protestations against common sense by these fellows with petrified minds. If you expect an increment of edification from the fact that the back of our colonial exercise books had tables and measures on them, you would be poorly served. Who the hell care for that miscellany? Now you should  know,  they were about what is required as fundamental preparation and preparation by the British way of pedagogy and  rote memory did not serve us well. it did not encourage inquiring minds. 

I bet you caught hell in first year university here where you were required to expand on formulas and show the logical development to the answer. It is not a matter of getting it right but knowing why it is right. It is nice to know you can look at a problem and identify it as a binomial and factorize it immediately. The understanding however  is in the writing down of the expansion of the problem and logically illustrating how you came up with the answer., 

So there is no value in memorizing the very basics?  So let's reinvent the wheel!   Banna you are in a vast minority.  No, I never caught hell the first year, not over math anyway.  I was very quick at working out mathematical problems in a business quizz!  The fact that I memorize the basics them apply to solve more complex problems allowed me to be fast. 

I never said there is no value in memorizing. I said memory has value only if the objects of memory are understood in terms of their fundamental properties.  You will work faster if you know there are commutative, additive and distributive properties as well as identity.

If the child knows 2 x 4 and that it is the same as 4 x 2  and why;  it helps to cut down on memorizing and aids thinking such that they are able for example to arrange terms to assist solving the problem. Arranging terms using    PEMDAS  is helped knowing this. It looks simplistic but it is fundamental 

ronan posted:
seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

fake issue sir . . . not a matter in dispute

there are no "principles" involved in foot, yard, inch, pound, miles, furlongs, pint, etc., measurements

And it is the reason they are abandoned in modern science where they as they are value on the large human sized scale where their fundamental errors can be overlooked. 

Baseman posted:
seignet posted:

I doan know wah exactly the beef's bout. I was discouraged from memorizing in a Static and Dynamic Course. The Prof insisted on a complete comprehension of the principles. Once the principles are understood its applications are easily applied in all case studies. The Prof insisted that should be the approach on all subjects.

Banna, relax!  Try not memorizing the 10 opinions a CPA can issue after an audit, you never pass the CPA exam!

that is arbitrary. Math is not.

Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

smfh

I know you are talking to me via Iquana's post so let me help your communication. All weights and measure are defined arbitrarily on some assigned property of material or thing. Indeed they are custom and practice but defined custom and practice and  the assigned values are worked out ie derived  from their frames of reference! And who is denying that the use of tables?

no, i was not "talking to" you fool . . . i was pouring RIDICULE on you

there are no "frames of reference" worth the name in the Imperial System

that's why SI/Metric rules the real world of science . . . the Europeans had the good sense to standardize and base their measures (in the main) on properties in nature that were constant

that's why, for example, the pound as a unit of weight had to be re-defined via a unit of mass (the kilogram) in the 20th Century . . . do you know why?

but, more to the point, i suppose that we should properly be teaching grade school kids to "derive" the Second (sec.) from calculations tied to differences in energy states of cesium-133

huh?

banna, haul yuh meandering stupid ass

ronan posted:
Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

smfh

I know you are talking to me via Iquana's post so let me help your communication. All weights and measure are defined arbitrarily on some assigned property of material or thing. Indeed they are custom and practice but defined custom and practice and  the assigned values are worked out ie derived  from their frames of reference! And who is denying that the use of tables?

no, i was not "talking to" you fool . . . i was pouring RIDICULE on you

there are no "frames of reference" worth the name in the Imperial System

that's why SI/Metric rules the real world of science . . . the Europeans had the good sense to standardize and base their measures (in the main) on properties in nature that were constant

that's why, for example, the pound as a unit of weight had to be re-defined via a unit of mass (the kilogram) in the 20th Century . . . do you know why?

but, more to the point, i suppose that we should properly be teaching grade school kids to "derive" the Second (sec.) from calculations tied to differences in energy states of cesium-133

huh?

banna, haul yuh meandering stupid ass

You imagine you pour ridicule being of impoverished mind. Every measure has a frame of reference else it has no meaning. And I am not talking relativity here least you read about t hat somewhere and would pedantically gravitate to it.

Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:
Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

smfh

I know you are talking to me via Iquana's post so let me help your communication. All weights and measure are defined arbitrarily on some assigned property of material or thing. Indeed they are custom and practice but defined custom and practice and  the assigned values are worked out ie derived  from their frames of reference! And who is denying that the use of tables?

no, i was not "talking to" you fool . . . i was pouring RIDICULE on you

there are no "frames of reference" worth the name in the Imperial System

that's why SI/Metric rules the real world of science . . . the Europeans had the good sense to standardize and base their measures (in the main) on properties in nature that were constant

that's why, for example, the pound as a unit of weight had to be re-defined via a unit of mass (the kilogram) in the 20th Century . . . do you know why?

but, more to the point, i suppose that we should properly be teaching grade school kids to "derive" the Second (sec.) from calculations tied to differences in energy states of cesium-133

huh?

banna, haul yuh meandering stupid ass

I am not talking relativity here least you read about t hat somewhere and would pedantically gravitate to it.

wtf do you know about "relativity"?

banna tek a seat with yuh Cliff Notes self, yeh

ronan posted:
Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:
Stormborn posted:
ronan posted:

the irony is amplified when you consider that the Imperial System of Weights and Measures is based solely on custom and practice (at one time some pieces of wood and iron in the British parliament buildings that burnt down in 1834 - thanks google!) . . . that's it

nothing to be "derived" there . . . only memorized

more irony . . . mastering x-times tables facilitates rapid arithmetic calculations for real-world use of these measures

smfh

I know you are talking to me via Iquana's post so let me help your communication. All weights and measure are defined arbitrarily on some assigned property of material or thing. Indeed they are custom and practice but defined custom and practice and  the assigned values are worked out ie derived  from their frames of reference! And who is denying that the use of tables?

no, i was not "talking to" you fool . . . i was pouring RIDICULE on you

there are no "frames of reference" worth the name in the Imperial System

that's why SI/Metric rules the real world of science . . . the Europeans had the good sense to standardize and base their measures (in the main) on properties in nature that were constant

that's why, for example, the pound as a unit of weight had to be re-defined via a unit of mass (the kilogram) in the 20th Century . . . do you know why?

but, more to the point, i suppose that we should properly be teaching grade school kids to "derive" the Second (sec.) from calculations tied to differences in energy states of cesium-133

huh?

banna, haul yuh meandering stupid ass

I am not talking relativity here least you read about t hat somewhere and would pedantically gravitate to it.

wtf do you know about "relativity"?

banna tek a seat with yuh Cliff Notes self, yeh

OF course you presume you know more. Cliff notes are for liberal arts if only to be pedantic.

cain posted:

The two ayou rass doan have a main squeeze or blowup doll to go hug up?

Banna rest you Rass.. the best Saturday nite fight since Mohammad Ali and Holyfield. 

I puffing me cigar and having a shot of Jonny walker .. 

sweet bhai. 

Add Reply

Likes (1)
Baseman
Post

×
×
×
×
×