Math Problem
 

jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It is now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but you did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

jeffie, the problem was solved days ago. Everyone else understood that, how
come you are so slow to catch on. didn't you say you had an arts degree in
physics from Potatoe State of some such? keep up Forrest.

Right, jaxie, and everyone thinks you're the "definitive reference" for
navigation, mathematics, and science.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffie, listen to me. every last person who reads this ng and who has
actually
studied physics or math KNOWS that your claim of a degree (BS, let alone
BS)
is
bogus just by reading your nonsense below. utter nonsense, to everyone who
has
studied even one semestrer in what you claim to have a degree in.

Your complete lack of familiarity of the underlying and overlying concepts
makes a lie of your claim.

Discussing concepts with you is like discussing auto mechanics with an art
history major.

Math Problem
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
donny, sq rt 50 is easy to do in one's head.

Yeah, you're right!

7.071067811865475244008443



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"7" is a philosophical contruct, therefore it cannot be considered in the
context of "luck" without leaving its construct behind.

To ask if "7" is a lucky number is to ask if a rock has shaktipa.

but still you can't have an opinion of a number.

7 is a lucky number. Do you agree?

Math Problem
 

doonyy, the context was boating so your calculation was needlessly precise
without gaining utility. but I am glad you can calculate square roots in your
head accurately to 21 decimal places.

The rest of us find that "a little over 7 knots" gives us more than enough
precision AND accuracy in the context of boating.

donny, sq rt 50 is easy to do in one's head.

Yeah, you're right!

7.071067811865475244008443



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"Donal" wrote in message
...
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
donny, sq rt 50 is easy to do in one's head.

Yeah, you're right!

7.071067811865475244008443

You stopped just when it was getting interesting.

Math Problem
 

Jaxie, saying there must have been a current from the southwest is NOT "solving
the problem." You can repeat it over and over, but its is NOT solving the
problem. And you didn't even try the second problem.

The fact that you don't even know that this is a navigational problem that can
be solved by a variety of methods is truly pathetic.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It is
now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but you did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards 045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

I also said to make 2.5 easting would require a current component from 180 at 5
knots and a current component of 2.5 east.

I also said that with a heading of 190 one would make *some* directly easting
with a current of 5 knots at 011.

I said that in the very first posting. jeffies, the very first posting.

Let me guess, *you* with your claimed arts degree in physics from Potatoe
State STILL don't under that that completely and totally identifies the
solution.

Can *you* implement the solution? Hell, no. You don't even understand the
solution. but the solution was there and the rest of the world understood it.

Jaxie, saying there must have been a current from the southwest is NOT
"solving
the problem." You can repeat it over and over, but its is NOT solving the
problem. And you didn't even try the second problem.

The fact that you don't even know that this is a navigational problem that
can
be solved by a variety of methods is truly pathetic.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It is
now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us
that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but you
did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

Saying the current is the sum of various "components" is the start of the
problem. The "math problem" is knowing how to compute the sum of the
components. If the captain asks the navigator to give a course, given a
current, the answer is not, "it has a component from the south and another from
the west." Ask someone at the Power Squadron, they'll show you how to do it.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards 045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

I also said to make 2.5 easting would require a current component from 180 at
5
knots and a current component of 2.5 east.

I also said that with a heading of 190 one would make *some* directly easting
with a current of 5 knots at 011.

I said that in the very first posting. jeffies, the very first posting.

Let me guess, *you* with your claimed arts degree in physics from Potatoe
State STILL don't under that that completely and totally identifies the
solution.

Can *you* implement the solution? Hell, no. You don't even understand the
solution. but the solution was there and the rest of the world understood it.

Jaxie, saying there must have been a current from the southwest is NOT
"solving
the problem." You can repeat it over and over, but its is NOT solving the
problem. And you didn't even try the second problem.

The fact that you don't even know that this is a navigational problem that
can
be solved by a variety of methods is truly pathetic.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It is
now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us
that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but you
did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

not "various" components. *two* componants.

AND I did add them for you (not *you* personally, jeffies, for you couldn't
understand the answer).

jeffies, just where did you say you got you arts degree in physics? Mind
sharing with us you SAT Math score? Was it above 325?

Saying the current is the sum of various "components" is the start of the
problem. The "math problem" is knowing how to compute the sum of the
components. If the captain asks the navigator to give a course, given a
current, the answer is not, "it has a component from the south and another
from
the west." Ask someone at the Power Squadron, they'll show you how to do it.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards
045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

I also said to make 2.5 easting would require a current component from 180
at
5
knots and a current component of 2.5 east.

I also said that with a heading of 190 one would make *some* directly
easting
with a current of 5 knots at 011.

I said that in the very first posting. jeffies, the very first posting.

Let me guess, *you* with your claimed arts degree in physics from Potatoe
State STILL don't under that that completely and totally identifies the
solution.

Can *you* implement the solution? Hell, no. You don't even understand
the
solution. but the solution was there and the rest of the world understood
it.

Jaxie, saying there must have been a current from the southwest is NOT
"solving
the problem." You can repeat it over and over, but its is NOT solving the
problem. And you didn't even try the second problem.

The fact that you don't even know that this is a navigational problem that
can
be solved by a variety of methods is truly pathetic.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It
is
now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us
that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but
you
did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

You're pretty nosy for someone who won't reveal their name, or what kind of boat
they have. We heard it was an Irwin. Figures.

Sorry Jaxie, you jealousy is showing again. You always seem obsessed with high
school - that's pretty pathetic for someone who claims to be over 50.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
not "various" components. *two* componants.

AND I did add them for you (not *you* personally, jeffies, for you couldn't
understand the answer).

jeffies, just where did you say you got you arts degree in physics? Mind
sharing with us you SAT Math score? Was it above 325?

Saying the current is the sum of various "components" is the start of the
problem. The "math problem" is knowing how to compute the sum of the
components. If the captain asks the navigator to give a course, given a
current, the answer is not, "it has a component from the south and another
from
the west." Ask someone at the Power Squadron, they'll show you how to do it.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards
045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

I also said to make 2.5 easting would require a current component from 180
at
5
knots and a current component of 2.5 east.

I also said that with a heading of 190 one would make *some* directly
easting
with a current of 5 knots at 011.

I said that in the very first posting. jeffies, the very first posting.

Let me guess, *you* with your claimed arts degree in physics from Potatoe
State STILL don't under that that completely and totally identifies the
solution.

Can *you* implement the solution? Hell, no. You don't even understand
the
solution. but the solution was there and the rest of the world understood
it.

Jaxie, saying there must have been a current from the southwest is NOT
"solving
the problem." You can repeat it over and over, but its is NOT solving the
problem. And you didn't even try the second problem.

The fact that you don't even know that this is a navigational problem that
can
be solved by a variety of methods is truly pathetic.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeff, the problem was solved within minutes of the original posting. It
is
now
several days later and you STILL are chasing your tail trying to tell us
that
you understood the solution but you didn't understand the solution but
you
did
understand but you didn't but you did but you didn't but but but.

Math Problem
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
"7" is a philosophical contruct,

Are you telling us that "7" is not a number?


Wow! You reall are very weird.





To ask if "7" is a lucky number is to ask if a rock has shaktipa.

Rubbish. I didn't ask if "7" was a lucky number. I "told" you that it
was lucky.



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards
045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

Jax, you gave a long, covoluted answer. I tried reading it, and I gave up.
I still have no idea what you were trying to say in your initial answer.
Somehow, your answer reminded me of your attempts to find the Gulf
Stream..... you were probably *technically* correct. However, you failed
to accomplish anything.


Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"Donal" wrote in message news:c25sb8$7bb$3

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
"7" is a philosophical contruct,

Are you telling us that "7" is not a number?

Wow! You reall are very weird.


And he calls everyone else a "sophist"!

Math Problem
 

donny, math is a little heavy for litewaits.

numbers are philosophical constructs.

you weren't talking math, but rather the representation of numbers in the
context of superstition.

nice try, though.

"7" is a philosophical contruct,

Are you telling us that "7" is not a number?


Wow! You reall are very weird.





To ask if "7" is a lucky number is to ask if a rock has shaktipa.

Rubbish. I didn't ask if "7" was a lucky number. I "told" you that it
was lucky.



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

give it up, jeffies. heavy math is beyond you. Hell, simple math is beyond
you.

"7" is a philosophical contruct,

Are you telling us that "7" is not a number?

Wow! You reall are very weird.


And he calls everyone else a "sophist"!

Math Problem
 

hard to understand, wasn't it donny. "a little over 7 knots and heading 045".

Which word confused you?

jeffie, knock it off. I said a current of a little over 7 knots towards
045
against a speed of 5 knots south would give an easting 5 knots.

Jax, you gave a long, covoluted answer. I tried reading it, and I gave up.
I still have no idea what you were trying to say in your initial answer.
Somehow, your answer reminded me of your attempts to find the Gulf
Stream..... you were probably *technically* correct. However, you failed
to accomplish anything.


Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

Nice try jaxie. You're the one who couldn't solve the math problem, you just
took a guess, which was off by almost 10% and 5 degrees. And you didn't even
try the second problem until I gave you the answer.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
give it up, jeffies. heavy math is beyond you. Hell, simple math is beyond
you.

"7" is a philosophical contruct,

Are you telling us that "7" is not a number?

Wow! You reall are very weird.


And he calls everyone else a "sophist"!

Math Problem
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
donny, math is a little heavy for litewaits.

numbers are philosophical constructs.

So, you are saying that it is not possible to have an opinion about a
philisophical construct???

You really are an an absolute idiot, aren't you?

Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
"Donal" wrote in message
...
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
donny, sq rt 50 is easy to do in one's head.

Yeah, you're right!

7.071067811865475244008443

You stopped just when it was getting interesting.

I'm a tease, huh?



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
hard to understand, wasn't it donny. "a little over 7 knots and heading
045".

Which word confused you?

"Jax".



Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

No. He's not perfect.

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
donny, math is a little heavy for litewaits.

numbers are philosophical constructs.

So, you are saying that it is not possible to have an opinion about a
philisophical construct???

You really are an an absolute idiot, aren't you?

Regards


Donal
--

Math Problem
 

not when we are talking about numbers as symbols.

donny, math is a little heavy for litewaits.

numbers are philosophical constructs.

So, you are saying that it is not possible to have an opinion about a
philisophical construct???

You really are an an absolute idiot, aren't you?

Regards


Donal
--