The official help me get a degree thread

[MoogleViper]

I couldn't find the old thread so I'll start a new one.

 

Prove that when m and n are integers, n is always a multiple of 6. n=m³-m

[Iun]

I couldn't find the old thread so I'll start a new one.

 

Prove that when m and n are integers, n is always a multiple of 6. n=m³-m

 

...

 

You know what's more fun than maths? Girls! Girls and their vaginas!

 

But in the spirit of learning, I'm going to answer your question with a question:

 

"Prove that when your degree is higher maths, that finding integers, indices, rationals and irrationals is going to get you a hot wife"

[EEVILMURRAY]

Go see the Wizard of Oz. Scarecrow did fuck all study but he got a diploma.

[chairdriver]

n = m^3 - m

n = m (m^2 -1)

 

By difference of two squares: n = m(m+1)(m-1)

 

Thus either m+1, m or m-1 must be a multiple of 3, since they are three consecutive integers. And one of the three will always be an even number, ie. a multiple of 2.

 

Thus; n = a.2b.3c where a,b,c are arbitrary integers. Therefore n = 6d, where d is again an arbitrary integer. Hence n is always a multiple of 6.

 

 

Done, and dusted, so well.

[Mr_Odwin]

n = m^3 - m

n = m (m^2 -1)

 

By difference of two squares: n = m(m+1)(m-1)

 

Thus either m+1, m or m-1 must be a multiple of 3, since they are three consecutive integers. And one of the three will always be an even number, ie. a multiple of 2.

 

Thus; n = a.2b.3c where a,b,c are arbitrary integers. Therefore n = 6d, where d is again an arbitrary integer. Hence n is always a multiple of 6.

 

 

Done, and dusted, so well.

 

Nice.

 

 

I immediately thought of proof by induction but your method is so much more concise.

Proof by induction:

Works for 2? 2^3-2 = 6. Yes.

Works for 3? 3^3-3 = 24. Yes.

 

Inductive leap. Assume works for k, an arbitrary integer: k^3-k. Yes.

 

Then for k+1:

(k+1)^3 -(k+1) = ... = (k^3-k) +3k(k+1)

 

We know k^3-k is divisible by 6.

k(k+1) must be an even number times by an odd number which is even so 3k(k+1) must be divisible by 6 also.

[Supergrunch]

Chair's method for the win I think, if he wanted girls it'd get him them. :wink:

[Mr_Odwin]

Chair's method for the win I think, if he wanted girls it'd get him them. :wink:

 

Attracted by the maths, repelled (in the nicest possible way) by the blatant homosexuality. :p

 

[chairdriver]

Attracted by the maths, repelled (in the nicest possible way) by the blatant homosexuality. :p

 

 

Although,

 

 

She loves it.

[MoogleViper]

A big thank you to you good sir.

[EEVILMURRAY]

She loves it.

You seem to be enjoying it ALOT more.

 

Out of shot strap-on perhaps?

[jayseven]

So who wants to do my homework for me? Do a word-association experiment to see how your subjects' mental lexicons are organised.

 

Actually I might just do it myself - it seems quite fun.

[Mr-Paul]

Anyone feel like discussing whether there is a distinct conservative ideology?

 

I don't.

 

Blahpolitcscrappppp

[Molly]

Chair's method for the win I think, if he wanted girls it'd get him them. :wink:

It really would!

[Haden]

Anyone feel like discussing whether there is a distinct conservative ideology?

 

I don't.

 

Blahpolitcscrappppp

 

Check out English philosophers and politicians in the aftermath of the French Revolution. Espcially this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke

 

Then later as the floodgates for an increased electorate opened. Disraeli will be very useful for this bit. He appealed to Conservatism being the natural party of the people compared to narrow elitist liberal interests. Something Michael Howard did rallying against mass immigration in defence of a threat to the white working class.

 

Maybe bring in aspects of Majors back to basics vision of a past Green England which is being mirrored by Sarkozy in France atm.

 

You could have fun with this essay talking about splits of conservatism Ron Paul and John McCain for example. I mean Fox news probably hate Ron Paul a Republican Candidate more than some of the Democrat ones! Basically Conservatives who believe in the good influence of American interventionist power and hard patriotism vs isolationist look after ourselves first type of Conservative.

 

Also maybe talk about how when a national institution reaches a certain point of history and penetrates the national character maybe a generation or so. The Tories who may have once opposed it now say they are the natural party to look after it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8210977.stm

 

Sorry a real incoherent ramble there. Hope its a tiny bit of use.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Haden

[Mr-Paul]

Thanks, I was trying to write in a way where i was presenting arguments for there being a distinct ideology, then arguments against it, but I found that didn't really work.

 

i'm trying to restart it by showing how the Tory party started out and the influence of Burke and Disraeli and going on from there, linking it back to them and 'One nation' conservatism where applicable but also providing contrast when it comes to Maggie Thatcher's more neoliberal approach and debates in the party today on which way they're going.

 

Meh, I think I know more about it than I think I do, it's just quite hard getting it down into a coherent essay! It kinda sucks when all the books that I've got out are prettty useless or too confusing and wikipedia is the best source (which we can't reference at all!)

[Ten10]

For anything maths related, from now on just use bing.

 

Documentation

 

Now powered by wolfram Alpha

[Mr_Odwin]

For anything maths related, from now on just use bing.

 

Documentation

 

Now powered by wolfram Alpha

 

Wolfram Alpha, although powerful enough, is nowhere near the level needed to provide a mathematical proof like the ones above. It lacks intuition, which is often needed.

[Cube]

Wolfram Alpha, although powerful enough, is nowhere near the level needed to provide a mathematical proof like the ones above. It lacks intuition, which is often needed.

 

Plus, the steps towards the answer are usually more important than the answer.

[chairdriver]

Can someone help me with:

 

Use the binomial theorem to show that

 

(1 + 2/(n^1/2))^n >= n for n >= 1 (>= is "greater than or equal to")

[EEVILMURRAY]

Nice.

 

 

I immediately thought of proof by induction but your method is so much more concise.

Proof by induction:

Works for 2? 2^3-2 = 6. Yes.

Works for 3? 3^3-3 = 24. Yes.

 

Inductive leap. Assume works for k, an arbitrary integer: k^3-k. Yes.

 

Then for k+1:

(k+1)^3 -(k+1) = ... = (k^3-k) +3k(k+1)

 

We know k^3-k is divisible by 6.

k(k+1) must be an even number times by an odd number which is even so 3k(k+1) must be divisible by 6 also.

 

I don't think I ever came across "^", what does it signify?

[chairdriver]

I don't think I ever came across "^", what does it signify?

 

Normally in maths it signifies the vector cross product, and it's often pronounced "vec". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_product

 

However, here it's used to denote powers, because there's no easy way to do superscripts in a forum environment. 3^2 = 3x3 = 9

[Nintendohnut]

Ah man it's really cute/cool that what used to be a 'help with my homework!' thread has now become a Uni based one as all the aficionados grow up and move away I think its awesome that we've kind of all grown up together as a part of this community and shizzle. Anyway, as I do English Lit there isn't much help you guys can give me short of physically writing essays for me but at least I know you're here if I did ever need that :p

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Ah man it's really cute/cool that what used to be a 'help with my homework!' thread has now become a Uni based one as all the aficionados grow up and move away I think its awesome that we've kind of all grown up together as a part of this community and shizzle. Anyway, as I do English Lit there isn't much help you guys can give me short of physically writing essays for me but at least I know you're here if I did ever need that :p

I'm still in high school for a year! >_<'

[Calza]

I've been struggling with this essay for weeks now, what are your guys tips for actually writing a good solid essay? It's on digital rights management and the question just seems out of date which is really rather annoying.

[Will]

When I was at uni I would write my essays like this:

 

1. A little reading around the subject (this stage didn't often happen)

2. Decide on my conclusion.

3. Bullet point each thing I want to cover, making sure the first leads through nicely to the conclusion.

4. Flesh out the bullet points.

 

Which should leave you with a pretty much completed essay. I guess you might also read through it at the end to make sure it makes sense. I never bothered though.