YouTube brings a SAT question.
We have a circle of radius that is 1/3 of the radius of another circle.
They ask how many times the smaller circle goes around the bigger circle.
The answer should be 3: 2 Pi r/3 would be the length of the circumference of the smaller circle.
With this, we need to multiply it by 3 to get 2 Pi r, which is the circumference of the bigger circle.
That means that the length of the smaller circumference will mean 3 turns over the bigger one for it to go back to the initial point.
Please write to drmarciapinheiro@gmail.com if you want to converse about any of the contents of my blogs here.
Pizza brings an interesting question and an even more interesting correction of the student's answer: the student seems to have used good logic.
I thought in the same way, to be sincere.
It is confusing.
Marty is told to have eaten 4/6 of his pizza.
Luis is told to have eaten 5/6 of his pizza.
Marty ate more pizza than Luis.
How is that possible?
The student answered: Marty's pizza was bigger.
That sounds really logical: You just have a larger radius for this pizza, and therefore his 4/6 ends up being more value in pizza than Luis' 5/6.
If you do not specify to the level you are thinking, the student has to win on this one.
If the intentions were saying that that was unreasonable, as the presenter states, the teacher would have to have written pizzas of the same size.
It says it is about being reasonable.
When you ask us why, reasonable is assuming that whatever you described is a fact, has already happened, not that you are lying or inventing.
Reasonable has to be where the average thinker goes with their thinking when reading.
Maybe those who know Mathematics would think like the boy did...
MM brings an interesting YouTube video about the number zero and why dealing with it is really hard.
The most interesting thing that I found here is the alternative way of talking about division.
The guy makes use of subtraction to explain it.
If your numerator is larger than your denominator, all works relatively OK, is it not? 5/4, for instance, can be explained in this way: 5-4=1 1-4 is negative, so that we cannot do it.
We then have one and one fourth as a result. 4/5 could be explained in this way: 4-5 gives you negative, so that we cannot do it.
We get 4/5 or 0 and something.
What if you have negative in the upper or lower part of the fraction?
