Advertisement
DIVIDEND
Boreta/RD (Glitch Mob)
Mr. Rogers (Ooze System/Full Melt)
Genji (Word of Mouth)
Poleng Lounge
1751 Fulton Ave @ Masonic
10-2a / $5
San Francisco – Mathematicians from the Equations Program of False Profit,
LLC recently announced plans to disprove a widely-accepted arithmetical
operation: Division.
“We’ve been seduced by the simple allure of division,” said Bex Hurwitz, a
senior Computational Adjuster, at False Profit, LLC. “We were taught long
division in grade school as though it were fact. We were—to put it
mildly—led astray.”
The theory of division states that a number gets smaller the more it is
divided. In economics, a ‘dividend’ is the amount of an asset each
shareholder receives. According to the theory of division, the dividend a
shareholder receives should get smaller as the number of shareholders
increases. False Profit, LLC intends to prove otherwise.
They invite all shareholders to the Poleng Lounge this Thursday, where the
Dividend will actually increase as the number of shareholders increases.
Boreta/RD (Glitch Mob)
Mr. Rogers (Ooze System/Full Melt)
Genji (Word of Mouth)
Poleng Lounge
1751 Fulton Ave @ Masonic
10-2a / $5
San Francisco – Mathematicians from the Equations Program of False Profit,
LLC recently announced plans to disprove a widely-accepted arithmetical
operation: Division.
“We’ve been seduced by the simple allure of division,” said Bex Hurwitz, a
senior Computational Adjuster, at False Profit, LLC. “We were taught long
division in grade school as though it were fact. We were—to put it
mildly—led astray.”
The theory of division states that a number gets smaller the more it is
divided. In economics, a ‘dividend’ is the amount of an asset each
shareholder receives. According to the theory of division, the dividend a
shareholder receives should get smaller as the number of shareholders
increases. False Profit, LLC intends to prove otherwise.
They invite all shareholders to the Poleng Lounge this Thursday, where the
Dividend will actually increase as the number of shareholders increases.
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:05 PMWell, my cells have been dividing over and over for, like... well a while now, and there do seem to be more of them than ever before. Except for those few days in early January 2004 after a brutal holiday season... Still, the concept makes perfect sense to me! Very tempted to risk it all and go crazy with the "new math" whizes at Dividend this Thurs!!!
*^_^* -
-
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:31 PMwell, RD sometimes makes my brain explode.
so i'm not sure i'll be up for in-depth analytical explorations of mathematical conceptualizations or reimagingings of commonly-held numerical belief structures. but i can say with certainty that i'll dance my ass off. and possibly be down to exchange some very simple sentences. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 1:45 PMif you ask me, those False Profit people are prime-time whack jobs. my teachers never lied to me.
but i'm still going...cuz even if those nutters hate division they still know how to add.
RD+Boreta
-
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:46 PM<<<so i'm not sure i'll be up for in-depth analytical explorations of mathematical conceptualizations or reimagingings of commonly-held numerical belief structures.>>>
it's quite simple, really:
given a ring (R,*,+) and elements n and p in R, we can say that "n divides p" if there exist some m in R such that p=n*m. now, let n be a natural number representing the quantity of humans splitting some quantity of profits, which we denote "p" (let's assume that p>0, cuz business is good). of course, in the familiar setting of the real numbers, if we have n>n', p=n*m, and p=n'*m' then clearly m<m'. but note that this only holds in an ordered field, such as the reals; it does not hold for unordered sets, such as the complex numbers. now, it is a simple matter to show that dividend is a linear map from the reals to the complex plane. the proof is left to the reader as an exercise.
please bring your solutions by during my office hours: 10p-2a this thursday night, poleng lounge. late responses earn no credit. -
-
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:50 PMhint: the above proof is simplified greatly if you let profits=false
(which of course, is real, irrational, and has a nonzero imaginary component) -
-
Re: Dividend: RD, Boreta, Mr. Rogers, Genji
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:29 PMi only understand imaginary numbers.
i do not, however, understand unimaginary humans.
given that this is my last week of being 30, i shall also provide proof that the greater number of Dividends that occur in a human life, the greater value that life has. but, we all know that. -
-
Re: i only understand imaginary numbers.
Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:00 AMI had a student say to me once, "IMAGINARY? You can't just make up numbers!!"
Which I loved, because then I got to say, "Aren't they all made up?"
-
-
-
-
-
-
a little PEMDAS
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 5:57 PMDividend = (move it + groove it)^(shake it) -
-
Re: a little PEMDAS
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 10:33 PMmmm, talk about New Math... this I can get excited about! -
-
mmmm . . . PEMDAS . . .
Fri, September 28, 2007 - 10:08 AMthat was so fun - most excellent opportunity to contemplate the New Math while grooooovin out.
-
-
