Sasun Posted August 21, 2004 Report Share Posted August 21, 2004 Hard to argue with that kind of result Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? if you're talking about my insurance premium, then i'll take the former... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 Think again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? I tried to see the challenge in this question but could not. Seems simple - depends on the interest rate. I am assuming the raise amounts are per year. Am I missing something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 There's no interst. You are getting a lump sum either anually (like $10,000 a year) or sum/2 every six months ($5,000 + $5,000). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think it's a matter of interpretation. A 500$ raise (on an semiannual basis) is the equivalent of a 1000$ annual raise. If the premise is that you're getting it every six months, therefore 2 raises a year, then: Looking at option 1, if you take the 500$ semi annual raise, and your salary is X, the chart shows your income at six month intervals (hence the annual salary of X dividedby 2) X/2 + 500 (X+500)/2 + 500 (X+1000)/2 + 500 (X+1500)/2 + 500 (X+2000)/2 + 500 (X+2500)/2 + 500 So the total after 3 years gives us: 3X + 6750$, which works out to an annual increase of 2250$, a whole 250$ higher than the 2000$ offered as option 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 (edited) I dont get it Vava jan. Assuming 50K salary to start after 10 years(each line is 6 months) 500 50500 0 50000 500 51000 2000 52000 500 51500 0 52000 500 52000 2000 54000 500 52500 0 54000 500 53000 2000 56000 500 53500 0 56000 500 54000 2000 58000 500 54500 0 58000 500 55000 2000 60000 500 55500 0 60000 500 56000 2000 62000 500 56500 0 62000 500 57000 2000 64000 500 57500 0 64000 500 58000 2000 66000 500 58500 0 66000 500 59000 2000 68000 500 59500 0 68000 500 60000 2000 70000 Edited October 24, 2005 by Azat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? There's no interst. You are getting a lump sum either anually (like $10,000 a year) or sum/2 every six months ($5,000 + $5,000). 500 is not 2000/2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 i didn't calculate 500 vs 2000, but for x/2 semi-anually vb x anually... basically, by the end of the year, your salary is the same, but during the second half of the year you have been paid with x/2 raise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 monthly monthly 48000 4000 48000 4000 month 1 4000 4000 month 2 4000 4000 month 3 4000 4000 month 4 4000 4000 month 5 4000 4000 month 6 48500 4041.67 4000 month 7 4041.67 4000 month 8 4041.67 4000 month 9 4041.67 4000 month 10 4041.67 4000 month 11 4041.67 4000 month 12 49000 4083.33 49000 4083.33 month 13 4083.33 4083.33 month 14 4083.33 4083.33 month 15 4083.33 4083.33 month 16 4083.33 4083.33 month 17 4083.33 4083.33 month 18 49500 4125 4083.33 month 19 4125 4083.33 month 20 4125 4083.33 month 21 4125 4083.33 month 22 4125 4083.33 month 23 4125 4083.33 month 24 sum 97500 97000 50000 50000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 monthly monthly 48000 4000 48000 4000 month 1 4000 4000 month 2 4000 4000 month 3 4000 4000 month 4 4000 4000 month 5 4000 4000 month 6 48500 4041.67 4000 month 7 4041.67 4000 month 8 4041.67 4000 month 9 4041.67 4000 month 10 4041.67 4000 month 11 4041.67 4000 month 12 49000 4083.33 49000 4083.33 month 13 4083.33 4083.33 month 14 4083.33 4083.33 month 15 4083.33 4083.33 month 16 4083.33 4083.33 month 17 4083.33 4083.33 month 18 49500 4125 4083.33 month 19 4125 4083.33 month 20 4125 4083.33 month 21 4125 4083.33 month 22 4125 4083.33 month 23 4125 4083.33 month 24 sum 97500 97000 50000 50000 Harut jan the second column shoudl be 2000 increase and not 1000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 (edited) 48000 4000 4000 48000 4000 4000 4000 8000 4000 8000 4000 12000 4000 12000 4000 16000 4000 16000 4000 20000 4000 20000 4000 24000 4000 24000 48500 4042 28042 48000 4000 28000 4042 32083 4000 32000 4042 36125 4000 36000 4042 40167 4000 40000 4042 44208 4000 44000 4042 48250 4000 48000 49000 4083 52333 50000 4167 52167 4083 56417 4167 56333 4083 60500 4167 60500 4083 64583 4167 64667 4083 68667 4167 68833 4083 72750 4167 73000 49500 4125 76875 50000 4167 77167 4125 81000 4167 81333 4125 85125 4167 85500 4125 89250 4167 89667 4125 93375 4167 93833 4125 97500 4167 98000 50000 4167 101667 52000 4333 102333 4167 105833 4333 106667 4167 110000 4333 111000 4167 114167 4333 115333 4167 118333 4333 119667 4167 122500 4333 124000 50500 4208 126708 52000 4333 128333 4208 130917 4333 132667 4208 135125 4333 137000 4208 139333 4333 141333 4208 143542 4333 145667 4208 147750 4333 150000 On teh 14th Month they the total salaries catch up Edited October 24, 2005 by Azat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted October 25, 2005 Report Share Posted October 25, 2005 Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? Depend on how much you want to work there. OK, OK, I've cheated, the answer was already there when I decided to think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted October 25, 2005 Report Share Posted October 25, 2005 (edited) Which deal would you take ... ... a $500 raise every 6 months? ... or a $2000 raise every year? I get paid monthly, if someone's offering, I'll take the 2 grand a year. Edited October 25, 2005 by skhara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 25, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2005 Harut jan the second column shoudl be 2000 increase and not 1000 actually, i was going by Sip's second post, where he said full anually or half semi-anually... i thought he made a mistake on the first post... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hytga Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 ok i've been banging my head for two days now without success over this. i'm trying to get the square root of a number without using Math.sqrt or Math.pow functions in java. does anyone know of a method to get the sqrt of a number without these? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 What kind of number? Any number? You can use some sort of iterative search to find the answer. One of the most common ways to do this is Newton's method. The basic iteration for doing Newton's method looks like this: x_next = x_curr - f(x_curr) / f'(x_curr) By starting from some x_curr, doing the iteration above repeatedly will eventually lead to an x such that f(x)=0, if such an x exists of course. To solve the square root problem, let f(x) = x*x - n where n is the number for which you want to find the square root. Then f'(x) in this case is 2x. Thus, the Newton's iteration becomes: x_next = x_curr - (x_curr*x_curr-n) / (2*x_curr) With a loop like this, you should be able to find a decent square root: x=1; while (abs( x * x - n) > 0.00001) { x = x - (x*x-n)/ (2*x); } Note that this thing will diverge if you let n=0 and will eventually cause a divide by 0 problem. But it should work fine for most cases. Also, you might be able to pick a better starting point than just 1. You may also wish to limit the total number of iterations as opposed to waiting for a certain accuracy (in this case 0.00001). The other things to watch out for is that you might end up at the negative square root of a number (depending on where you start) since each positive real number has potentially 2 real square roots. But that's an easy check on the final answer. Negative numbers for n will most likely cause problems too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hytga Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 (edited) thanks alot. i forgot that i studied the newtons method in calc 2. actually i forgot the newtons method too. this is exactly what i needed. to be able to decrease the error as much as i wanted for the sqrt. tnx again. Edited January 19, 2006 by hytga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 No prob! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 If I may insert a challeng, here is it. A car is travelling at a constant 120 km/h, it passes a cop on a motorcyle and the cop takes .2 seconds to take off after it. With an acceleration of 6 m/s/s, and a maximum speed of 150km/h, how long will it take for the cop to reach the car, and at what distance. I dont know the answer yet, it was a refresher problem in my dynamics course. I have to work it out anyways, lets see how this goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 ok i've been banging my head for two days now without success over this. i'm trying to get the square root of a number without using Math.sqrt or Math.pow functions in java. does anyone know of a method to get the sqrt of a number without these? runga kutta method works fastest, the equation should be on the net somewhere, its been a while, so i dont remember it percisely. edit: Newton's method is good too, most simple to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 ok... this is nto a math puzzle but its pretty cool. It was on car talk recently. Please dont just Google for the answer. --- Imagine that you and I are sitting opposite one other at a small round table at the kind you find at a bistro or a cafe, or some other place that sells overpriced beverages and desserts. Next to us is a supply, unlimited if need be, of soda pop bottles. Here's the game we're going to play: One of us is going to place a bottle on the table, upright. And then the other one's going to place a bottle on the table and that's going to end round one. The game consists of many rounds, perhaps. The same person who went first is going to put another bottle on the table, then the person who went second is going to put his bottle on the table. So, if you go first, you'll place your bottle on the table, then I'll place my bottle. In round two you place your bottle and I place my bottle, etc. We're going to continue to do this until we black out! Actually, we're going to continue to do this until somebody puts a bottle on the table that either doesn't fit, or falls off, or causes another bottle to fall off the table. The rule is that you can place your bottle anywhere on the table, but you can't move anyone else's bottle. The question very simply is: Is there a strategy to win? And do you want to go first or second? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted February 9, 2006 Report Share Posted February 9, 2006 Winning strategy: When the table gets nearly full, and there at least one bottle close to the edge of the table - as your opponent has nearly placed his bottle on the table, you imperceptibly kick the table leg nearest you. That'll cause the table to jiggle slightly and "your opponent" will have disturbed the bottles - resulting in your win No just kidding - that would be cheating, and everyone knows that no Armenian would ever cheat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted February 9, 2006 Report Share Posted February 9, 2006 How about you go first. You put your first bottle in the exact middle of the table. For your second bottle, you place it symmetrically opposed to your opponents first bottle. I'm not sure if that's how you express it, but essentially, for every bottle your opponenent places on the table, you place your next bottle at the exact opposite spot with respect to the middle of the table. This pretty much guarantees that at the end of the game there will be an odd number of bottles on the table - you having gone first, would be the winner. :D nice puzzle!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.