1 ÷ 0.5
this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2024
6 points (100.0% liked)
Science Memes
10842 readers
2289 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !reptiles and [email protected]
Physical Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !self [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
=2
Computers multiply by adding, subtract by adding, i'm not sure how division goes but i'm sure that's addition too.
Looked into it. It literally is.
But....how?
The other replies are simplifying too much. Just adding or subtracting in a loop would be far too slow.
A multiplier will find the partial products by using AND gates, and then sum them, which is very similar to long multiplication as they teach you in school. This article explains it pretty well.
Division is more complicated. It's sort of done like long division, but apparently that is slow and there's some magic with two's complements that can make it faster. Honestly I don't fully understand it yet.
That article was really good. I feel like if someone explained it to me at a pub or party I could somewhat talk about it without sounding like a total ludite.
It recursively subtracts until the number goes at or below zero. The iterations is the output and the reminder is how much it went below zero.
Subtract divisor from dividend until you hit zero. Number of subtractions is the quotient. Don't ask about non-whole numbers.
The remainder is the amount of overflow when you go below zero.
Once you go down to logic gates. A XOR gate for example makes 1+1 = 0
No comments about Amitabh Bachchan's use for meme. Well it should have been a long time coming, I'm glad that it's now here.
Bollywood itself is a meme 🤭. Just watch their version of The Matrix. Dude starts singing with "Trinity", like wtf!??
Lol it gets wtf long before he starts dancing with trinity.
Engineers: Pass the ketchup!
And mathematicians divide by multiplying!
In formal definitions of arithmetics, division is often defined via multiplication: as a simplified example with real numbers, because a ÷ 2 is the same as a × 0.5, if your axioms support multiplication you'll get division out of them for free.
Mathematicians also subtract by adding, with the same logic as with division.
Right. The cells are dividing in half, which would be represented in math form by 1/0.5 = 2. Dividing by one half is the same thing as multiplying by 2, and division in general is really just a visually simplified way to multiply by a fraction of 1.
Any time you divide by some fraction of 1, you will necessarily end up with a larger number because you're doubling that division which reverses it back into multiplication, much in the same way as a negative x negative = positive. If that makes sense.
A mathematician would not be bothered by this. A high schooler taking algebra I might be though, if you phrased it the same way this post did.
if your axioms support multiplication you’ll get division out of them for free
this is true... except when it isn't.
In mathematics, rings are algebraic structures that generalize fields: multiplication need not be commutative and multiplicative inverses need not exist
Yeah I should maybe just have written
if your axioms support multiplication you’ll get division out of them for free^*^
^*^certain terms and conditions may apply. Limited availability in some structures, North Korea, and Iran. Known to the state of California to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity
Cells: 🫣🫨😢
a/b is the unique solution x to a = bx, if a solution exists. This definition is used for integers, rationals, real and complex numbers.
Defining a/b as a * (1/b) makes sense if you're learning arithmetic, but logically it's more contrived as you then need to define 1/b as the unique solution x to bx = 1, if one exists, which is essentially the first definition.
That's me, a degree-holding full time computer scientist, just learning arithmetic I guess.
Bonus question: what even is subtraction? I'm 99% sure it doesn't exist since I've never used it, I only ever use addition.
what even is subtraction?
It's just addition wearing a trench coat, fake beard and glasses
Addition by the additive inverse.
Now you just replaced one incalculable thing with a different incalculable thing.
Eh?
Computers don't subtract, and you can't just add a negative, a computer can't interpret a negative number, it can only store a flag that the number is negative. You need to use a couple addition tricks to subtract to numbers to ensure that the computer only has to add. It's addition all the way down.
What does this have to do with computers?
Defining a/b as a * (1/b) makes sense if you’re learning arithmetic
The example was just to illustrate the idea not to define division exactly like that
That's the problem whenever math meets physics: the former wins in the theory, but in the real world physics always triumphs:-).
Clever and I get the joke and it made me smile. If I recall my biology from 20 years ago I think the cell makes duplicates of its chromosomes then splits apart. So you have two cells inside one membrane that separates, 2 / 1 = 2. The way I first thought about it was one cell splitting in half, so half goes to one cell, the other half with the other, 1 / .5 = 2.
In short, I think the math works out fine, but the language you use to describe it can lead to comedy gold. You could say cells reproduce by division? I don't know, I'm not a biologist or mathematician. I'm a toilet poster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_a_set?wprov=sfla1
The sets in [partition] P are called the blocks, parts, or cells, of the partition.
The number of cells in partition is >= 1.
It's simple, cells are fractions.
But it's turning 1 into 1/2+1/2 which is different than dividing by 2.
No, it's dividing 1 by 1/2 leading to 2.
A fundamental disregard for sets and their importance in higher mathematics.
Really is.
cry harder, number boy.
This could just as easily had been a reply with:
🤓
Damn, owned