If the multiplicative inverse of any non-zero real number is always 1, I suppose that 2 would be one more than 1? I'm getting back into math lately, so I had to go for this one. I'm trying to brush up on my
algebra,
calculus, and
discrete math. Ender and
Peter 17:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)reply
This is actually a first year algebra problem. The multiplicative inverse of 2 is 1/2, so it would be a number less than 2. You may need to use the the
quadratic formula, which gives two answers.
Buaidh 13:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Oh, I see. I was referring to a particular list titled Properties of Real Numbers from a book called College Algebra: Graphs and Models (
ISBN978-0321791009) and its description for the Multiplicative Inverse property is the formula that says any real number multiplied by its inverse is 1, so that's what I meant by saying the multiplicative inverse of any non-zero real number is always 1. I see how in this question, and I suppose generally, the term "multiplicative inverse" refers to a non-zero real number's own reciprocal, or inverse, rather than to the result of applying the property. The book also describes the Multiplicative Identity property as a formula stating that a real number multiplied by 1 is the original real number. The
multiplicative inverse article here describes the
multiplicative identity as another way of saying 1. I see how in both cases in the book, the name of the property is based on the factor by which the real number is multiplied. Alright, I will try to find those answers. Ender and
Peter 13:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Answer: X = 1 + 1/X = 0.5 ± √1.25 = the
Golden Ratio (1.6180339887498948482) and its
negative conjugate (-0.6180339887498948482).
What
U.S. state changed its name after it became a state?
Fortunately, you don't need any of the answers to attend the Wiknic.
Suggestion: Next year, let's hold our Wiknic on the first Sunday on or after July 9 so we don't conflict with the
Independence Day holiday or
LGBT events in June.
Buaidh 12:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Undead q (
talk) 00:08, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 1 or 2 persons, not sure on the second person yetreply
1 person. As usual, if anyone needs to catch a ride, ping me by email.
SeraphimbladeTalk to me 17:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Ender and
Peter 17:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC) I think I'll swing by this time. You guys are good people. Thank you, Buaidh, for being so hospitable to random intellectuals every year.reply
WillBerr 03:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC) Two persons coming from Michigan.reply
J.Smith 13:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
P.Smith 13:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
Joy of Hope 14:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
Maybe. -—
Isarra༆ 18:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC) (1-2.6 people)reply
I'll be there! --
Gaurav (
talk) 19:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)reply
If the multiplicative inverse of any non-zero real number is always 1, I suppose that 2 would be one more than 1? I'm getting back into math lately, so I had to go for this one. I'm trying to brush up on my
algebra,
calculus, and
discrete math. Ender and
Peter 17:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)reply
This is actually a first year algebra problem. The multiplicative inverse of 2 is 1/2, so it would be a number less than 2. You may need to use the the
quadratic formula, which gives two answers.
Buaidh 13:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Oh, I see. I was referring to a particular list titled Properties of Real Numbers from a book called College Algebra: Graphs and Models (
ISBN978-0321791009) and its description for the Multiplicative Inverse property is the formula that says any real number multiplied by its inverse is 1, so that's what I meant by saying the multiplicative inverse of any non-zero real number is always 1. I see how in this question, and I suppose generally, the term "multiplicative inverse" refers to a non-zero real number's own reciprocal, or inverse, rather than to the result of applying the property. The book also describes the Multiplicative Identity property as a formula stating that a real number multiplied by 1 is the original real number. The
multiplicative inverse article here describes the
multiplicative identity as another way of saying 1. I see how in both cases in the book, the name of the property is based on the factor by which the real number is multiplied. Alright, I will try to find those answers. Ender and
Peter 13:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Answer: X = 1 + 1/X = 0.5 ± √1.25 = the
Golden Ratio (1.6180339887498948482) and its
negative conjugate (-0.6180339887498948482).
What
U.S. state changed its name after it became a state?
Fortunately, you don't need any of the answers to attend the Wiknic.
Suggestion: Next year, let's hold our Wiknic on the first Sunday on or after July 9 so we don't conflict with the
Independence Day holiday or
LGBT events in June.
Buaidh 12:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Undead q (
talk) 00:08, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 1 or 2 persons, not sure on the second person yetreply
1 person. As usual, if anyone needs to catch a ride, ping me by email.
SeraphimbladeTalk to me 17:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Ender and
Peter 17:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC) I think I'll swing by this time. You guys are good people. Thank you, Buaidh, for being so hospitable to random intellectuals every year.reply
WillBerr 03:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC) Two persons coming from Michigan.reply
J.Smith 13:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
P.Smith 13:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
Joy of Hope 14:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC) 1 person
Maybe. -—
Isarra༆ 18:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC) (1-2.6 people)reply
I'll be there! --
Gaurav (
talk) 19:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)reply