AkinPhysicist:

Uggh! Not again. These people and their wahala Assumptions are part of mathematics. Look it up. If an integer solution exists you will find it. If you don't find it then you will KNOW that an integer solution does not exist. This itself is KNOWLEDGE you did not have prior to the count test. In the absence of an integer solution, then a more general approach can then be used to solve the problem.

naturalwaves:

Hahahaha. Very funny. Don't worry, will give you 90.

peacettw:


Kk then. He is very intelligent. Happy now?

GodIsBiafran:


Madam I find your research interesting - we should talk sometime. Are you Igbo?

peacettw:


What do you think?

GodIsBiafran:


I think Igbo

peacettw:


I think you might be correct.

AkinPhysicist:


Uggh! Not again. These people and their wahala Assumptions are part of mathematics. Look it up. If an integer solution exists you will find it. If you don't find it then you will KNOW that an integer solution does not exist. This itself is KNOWLEDGE you did not have prior to the count test. In the absence of an integer solution, then a more general approach can then be used to solve the problem.

StarBukola:
ohh for me?? I don't knw what to say

AkinPhysicist:

So? If it fails then you employ another method. Ki ni big deal?


Then use iteration if basic/logical counting fails. Again ki ni big deal?


Keep your 'lecture' to yourself, I am fully aware of the connection between iteration and Fibonacci



Using a calculator to solve this particular problem is like using a machete(cutlass) to kill a housefly. Its shows rigidity. A lack of clear thought.



Once again iteration is an overkill for this problem. You needed a calculator - I didn't


Tell me something I don't know.



You can't do basic/logical counting and you think you can give me homework...I laugh in Chinese

FisifunKododada:


So Cacewa - the emboldened is a calculator approach of what Akin did. The difference is you had to use a calculator be he didn't. He found a solution within a minute. This is what I have been trying to convey to you, you take a formal approach to math, Akin is just naturally intelligent.

inschool:

I didn't show my self...but u need to improve on ur approach to engaging argument/discussions with people...

AkinPhysicist:

PM yungmill moti so fun pe ko bu e ni 4k

peacettw:


why on earth as a nation do we have a ghost president. Goodluck finding the answer to that in Google.

skillful01:
akinphysicist and naturalwaves,you guy 've got pure intellect.

naturalwaves:

Why would you make an assumption when there is a legitimate way to go about it without assumption?

naturalwaves:

What you did is not different from a child

naturalwaves:

being asked to solve for X in 2+X=6 and then you start testing 1,2,3 etc to see which one will give 6.

naturalwaves:

That is trial method and it is demeaning for someone of your calibre.

naturalwaves:

Provide a suitable solution that is devoid of trial and error.

Horllamideh:

for real?? Ngbo yungmillionaire, a nilo attention yin nibi bayi

naturalwaves:

Thank you bro. Since Akinphysicist has decided to dance in circles and not provide a suitable solution to the question nor provide an alternative method that is more acceptable, let me solve it through a way that is devoid of wuruwuru and trial by error like he did for the benefits of secondary school students and others viewing the thread. See solution attached below.
cc:cacawa

AkinPhysicist:
Okay put 49 for X and see what happens. I solved this problem the moment you posted it. But like my colleagues above said, its too boring. You need to be more creative bruh. Here is my Homework for you:

post a solution that DOES NOT involve taking squares of but sides. Shikena.

skillful01:
akinphysicist and naturalwaves,you guy 've got pure intellect.

naturalwaves:

Thank you bro. Since Akinphysicist has decided to dance in circles and not provide a suitable solution to the question nor provide an alternative method that is more acceptable, let me solve it through a way that is devoid of wuruwuru and trial by error like he did for the benefits of secondary school students and others viewing the thread. See solution attached below.
cc:cacawa

Horllamideh:

for real?? Ngbo yungmillionaire, a nilo attention yin nibi bayi

AkinPhysicist:

Because its a fun out of the box kind of way of doing it


Good. Children can teach you are lot about imagination and creativity. Be a child once in a while and you will see things differently.

So? - as long as the child knows the answer has to be positive definite so he starts from zero instead of negative infinity. This child has learn far more mathematics than the people subtracting 2 from both sides to see what happens. Whatever its worth the child probably knows the subtraction method too.


It would be trial and error if I didn't know where to start and were to stop. See my post above about the creative child who knows where to start counting from. That is the key. There are quite a few advanced mathematics techniques that employ spanning a limited space to find element or elements that fulfill a particular restraint. This is what I did here. If you are wise you will learn.



If you truly believe I cannot solve this problem in the normal (school textbook way) then why are you engaging me in this conversation?

GodIsBiafran:


akinphysicist - yes but am not sure of the naturalwaves guy. He has not been fully vetted yet. Right now he is just making noise up and down.

AkinPhysicist:


Clap 4 yourself. Using my 'wuru wuru' method: No pen and paper needed. And it took me less than a minute. Try it. Its good for your brain.


By the way - we already hashed this out yesterday. Keep up. See this:

yorex2011:

yorex2011:

dingbang:
just look at u.. See when u are coming.. I mentioned ur moniker since and even sent a message on ur bbm.. Sha are ur numbers going?