Maths homework

[Dons_1988]

20 minutes ago, sugna said:

I had another think about this when brushing my teeth before going to bed.

Sort your fucking life out.

[Melanius Mullarkey]

Ten year old son running about with loads of roses?

So many questions.

[sugna]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

Sort your fucking life out.

My teeth were filthy.

While getting pelters, I'll ask for another offence to be taken into consideration. If I can't get to sleep, I check the 4-digit time on my alarm clock, then race the clock: find the prime factors of the time faster than the clock clicks through the minutes. The upside is that it works reasonably well as a sleep-inducer; the downside is that - as with so many things - you improve with practice; so the numbers become  bit easier, night-on-night, and the effect on getting to sleep becomes weaker. But it's always satisfying to find that a number that was "looking prime" has a factor of 19.

I feel that I'm straying into Prince Andrew territory on the voluntarily-shooting-self-in-foot front.

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 minutes ago, sugna said:

My teeth were filthy.

While getting pelters, I'll ask for another offence to be taken into consideration. If I can't get to sleep, I check the 4-digit time on my alarm clock, then race the clock: find the prime factors of the time faster than the clock clicks through the minutes. The upside is that it works reasonably well as a sleep-inducer; the downside is that - as with so many things - you improve with practice; so the numbers become  bit easier, night-on-night, and the effect on getting to sleep becomes weaker. But it's always satisfying to find that a number that was "looking prime" has a factor of 19.

I feel that I'm straying into Prince Andrew territory on the voluntarily-shooting-self-in-foot front.

How do you find time to say your prayers?

[sugna]

1 minute ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

How do you find time to say your prayers?

I'm just a weirdo, not an irrational fantasist.

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, sugna said:

My teeth were filthy.

While getting pelters, I'll ask for another offence to be taken into consideration. If I can't get to sleep, I check the 4-digit time on my alarm clock, then race the clock: find the prime factors of the time faster than the clock clicks through the minutes. The upside is that it works reasonably well as a sleep-inducer; the downside is that - as with so many things - you improve with practice; so the numbers become  bit easier, night-on-night, and the effect on getting to sleep becomes weaker. But it's always satisfying to find that a number that was "looking prime" has a factor of 19.

I feel that I'm straying into Prince Andrew territory on the voluntarily-shooting-self-in-foot front.

[JMDP]

I got X, the initial amount of roses as being 340, with 68 red and 272 white.

I would show working and do it by ascribing the red roses initially a value of r. If these are worth 20% and there are 80% white roses, then white roses must be 4 times the red roses, so they would have a value of 4r.

So, X = r + 4r or 5r

Then, for the next part  add on the extra roses. 

So red roses = r + 48

White roses = 4r + 76

Therefore, we need to find r to get the answer. Given that after roses are added, the proportion is now 25% red, 75% white, we can say that the number of white is three times greater than the number of red. So, going back to what we know, we can multiply our red roses by three then equate them to the white.

So 3(r+48) = 4r+76

3r + 144 = 4r + 76

144 = r + 76

r = 68

So going back to the start, with r being red roses, 4r being white and X being the total, there were 68 red roses (20%), 272 white roses (80%) and X, the total of roses was 340.

Adding the extra gives you 116 red (25%), 348 white (75%) and a total of 464.

I think this is right and would be clearest solution/pathway to do it. Maths isn't my specialism tho tbh. 

[pozbaird]

If a team has X amount of points, has played a Y amount of games, what is the value of Jim Goodwin’s severance package.

Over to you, maths buffs.

[Jacksgranda]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

You'd be surprised at how much professional maths uses an iterative approach like this to creep up on an answer.

It's relatively rare to have an analytic solution where you can just plug in a value for x and then get a straight answer.

Reported for homophobia

[Arnold Layne]

16 minutes ago, JMDP said:

I got X, the initial amount of roses as being 340, with 68 red and 272 white.

I would show working and do it by ascribing the red roses initially a value of r. If these are worth 20% and there are 80% white roses, then white roses must be 4 times the red roses, so they would have a value of 4r.

So, X = r + 4r or 5r

Then, for the next part  add on the extra roses. 

So red roses = r + 48

White roses = 4r + 76

Therefore, we need to find r to get the answer. Given that after roses are added, the proportion is now 25% red, 75% white, we can say that the number of white is three times greater than the number of red. So, going back to what we know, we can multiply our red roses by three then equate them to the white.

So 3(r+48) = 4r+76

3r + 144 = 4r + 76

144 = r + 76

r = 68

So going back to the start, with r being red roses, 4r being white and X being the total, there were 68 red roses (20%), 272 white roses (80%) and X, the total of roses was 340.

Adding the extra gives you 116 red (25%), 348 white (75%) and a total of 464.

I think this is right and would be clearest solution/pathway to do it. Maths isn't my specialism tho tbh. 

Thank you JMDP.  think this is probably how the homework question is supposed to be answered. But surely not by a ten year old.

[JMDP]

16 minutes ago, Arnold Layne said:

Thank you JMDP.  think this is probably how the homework question is supposed to be answered. But surely not by a ten year old.

No worries. Yeah, that doesn't sound like the appropriate level for a homework in primary 6. 

[Arnold Layne]

9 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

You don't need to consider the red roses at all but otherwise would agree with your method.

You need a balanced equation asking the same question on both sides.

On the left hand side you ask how many white roses are there in total given that you add 76.

0.8x + 76

But you've also started with x roses and added 124 in total. Out of that, 75% are white.

0.75(x + 124)

Now equate both sides, because both are telling you how many white roses there are, and solve for x. In the end it's a simple exercise in fractions and algebra but the tough bit is getting the equation in the first place.

The whole thing can be solved in 2 lines if you think about it at higher level rather than diving into the calculation but I am very surprised at 10 year olds being given that sort of question.

In summary:

0.8x + 76 = 0.75(x + 124)

x = 340

 

Very elegant.

[Shotgun]

This thread's gone downhill since the smart people arrived.

[mathematics]

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

You don't need to consider the red roses at all but otherwise would agree with your method.

 

Alternatively, you don't need to consider the white roses at all.

[welshbairn]

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

You don't need to consider the red roses at all

 

3 minutes ago, mathematics said:

you don't need to consider the white roses at all

FIGHT!

Edited November 19, 2019 by welshbairn

[Miguel Sanchez]

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

 

FIGHT!

What is it with the monarchy and chinlessness?

[The Moonster]

Still find it wild that we're giving 10 year olds homework, let alone homework that their dad needs to ask a football forum about. Get it in the bin and let the wee fucker enjoy himself.

[Miguel Sanchez]

4 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I'm sure the original poster is just absolutely devastated at having 3 solid answers to his question. 

Your attitude was absolutely rife in the estate I grew up in. All the thick c***s trying to pretend that being good at things like maths was seriously uncool and was something we should feel bad about. I remember a friend of many years completely cutting me off for getting "ideas above my station" because I moved out of Scotland after graduating.

Getting out of there was the best thing I ever did but that attitude still persists like a bad case of e-coli. Nothing seems to be able to shift it.

And you guys are screaming for independence the loudest apparently. Fucking hell. 

There's a reason people make fun of you, you tedious c**t.

[Dons_1988]

9 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I'm sure the original poster is just absolutely devastated at having 3 solid answers to his question. 

Your attitude was absolutely rife in the estate I grew up in. All the thick c***s trying to pretend that being good at things like maths was seriously uncool and was something we should feel bad about. I remember a friend of many years completely cutting me off for getting "ideas above my station" because I moved out of Scotland after graduating.

Getting out of there was the best thing I ever did but that attitude still persists like a bad case of e-coli. Nothing seems to be able to shift it.

And you guys are screaming for independence the loudest apparently. Fucking hell. 

This response to a flippant remark on a general nonsense thread suggests there's a large chip on your shoulder to be honest.

[Dan Steele]

10 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

moved out of Scotland after graduating.

Getting out of there was the best thing I ever did

Good education system, though.