• SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The rule is 3x +2

      The first isn’t 5x, it still follows the same rule.

      I never said they did, I was explaining how the rule would apply to anything, the first iteration is never 5x…

      What a fucked up way to explain a simple thing, while making yourself wrong at the same time… while attempting to call someone else out… yikes…

      • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Here, maybe some pictures will get it through your thick skull.

        One triangle:

        Five triangles:

        A triangle made into a tri-force equals five times as many triangles.

        From there, it becomes x3+2 (Ie: what my original comment, which you failed to read, said.)

        1 -> 5 -> 17

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Huh, the second still follows the rule of 3x +2…

          Why are you incorrectly saying it’s 5x?

          If you want to be pedantic and call someone out, atleast make sure you’re correct… there’s one rule, not two, the first isn’t 5x while the others are 3x +2.

          This isn’t a hard concept to understand, but it is incredibly ironic you called someone else out first and are still making this same folly….

          Or let me explain it this way, you said they failed their math assignment, do you know of any assignment that would be marked correct by using two different rules to explain a singular ruled equation……?

          • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Taking a triangle and making it into a tri-force = 5 times as many triangles, not 3.

            Then taking that and making it into further ti-forces is x3+2

            Which part of this statement is incorrect?

            At no point have I said further equations are also x5, only the original; 1*5=5.

            AGAIN try actually reading the comments you reply to.

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              1×3+2 = 5

              Sure you could claim it’s 5x, but why do that when the other rule you have already works?

              • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Because that was a simpler equation to read and equate to x3.

                1x3+2 = 5 = 1*5. They are equivalent.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Equivalent doesn’t mean correct.

                  It has one equation, and substituting another, one that’s only “correct” for a single very specific case for that matter…. Will always be marked wrong/incorrect.

                  You’ve failed your math assignment.

                  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    You’ve failed your math assignment.

                    TF are you talking about?

                    OP had an assignment: post 3x as many triangles.

                    I never had any assignment, I simply posted a couple equations illustrating how that has not happened.

                    Stating what singular equation covers every case is entirely your prerogative.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              You’ve failed your math assignment.

              The first part, there’s not two rules, the first isn’t 5x… that would be marked incorrect on an assignment….

              How is this so hard for you to understand? You seem to have wanted to call out OP for being off by 2, while you’re just using the wrong equation to begin with.

              You’ve failed your math assignment, there isn’t two rules, do I need to repeat this 5x before you comprehend or something…?

              • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                I said ONE triangle turned into a triforce is 5 times as many triangles as you started with.

                Regardless of which equation you use, that is true. Your really that pissed off I showed the simpler equation for a single instance??

                I explicitly stated the rule for following equations; to show, regardless, that it’s incorrect.

                Nothing I have said is untrue. You’re just being a pedantic asshole.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Nothing I have said is untrue. You’re just being a pedantic asshole.

                  Like you in your first comment…? Lmfao. You aren’t the quickest one are you?

                  You explicitly stated two equations, not “the rule” thats the issue dude… come on haha how can you say it’s “the rule” and provide two different ones…? That would be wrong on any test/assignment.

                  You are being pedantic, and I saw that you made a folly that would be marked wrong on any assignment, so I was playfully calling you out.

                  And then you went and made an idiot out of yourself :)

                  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    Taking a triangle and making it into a tri-force = 5 times as many triangles, not 3.

                    Correct. 1 * 5 = 5. Which is also equivalent to 1*3+2, though simpler.

                    Then taking that and making it into further ti-forces is x3+2

                    Correct.

                    You’ve failed your math assignment.

                    Correct. The above image is not 3x as many triangles as the previous post.

                    So once again, which part of this is wrong?

                    What a fucked up way to explain a simple thing, while making yourself wrong at the same time…

                    Just because I typed it differently than you would have doesn’t make the math suddenly wrong. I never said I was defining rules. Nor trying to narrow them down to a single rule. That was entirely your initiative.

                    I was simply showing how far away from “x3” it was; which in the first instance “x5” illustrates that point better.

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If the first is only 1 triangle, I can’t see how the second would be anything but 3 triangles.

          • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            The second triangle is 5 on account of the black triangle on the inside and the compound triangle made up of all three smaller triangles and the fourth negative space triangle. I believe the formula for how many triangles is linear because each iteration of the fractal can be represented as scooping more negative space triangles from the existing set of triangles. Each iteration you scoop out the same number of black triangles as you had white triangles the previous iteration, creating two more white triangles for every white triangle you had before, and adding one more compound triangle.

            The numbers we see though from each early iteration are as follows:

            1 -> 5 -> 17 -> 53 -> 161

            Which happens to conform with 3(n-1)+2

      • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Taking a triangle and making it into a tri-force = 5 times as many triangles, not 3.

        Then taking that and making it into further ti-forces is x3+2

        No really, you should actually read the comments you reply to.

        Even you said it:

        Where is the 5x…?

        1 becomes 5