#### Harry_the_cat

##### Senior Member

- Joined
- Mar 16, 2016

- Messages
- 1,683

May I suggest you think of 5 - 4 as:

Put 5 oranges out on your table and take away 4. There's 1 left.

- Thread starter Ryan$
- Start date

- Joined
- Mar 16, 2016

- Messages
- 1,683

May I suggest you think of 5 - 4 as:

Put 5 oranges out on your table and take away 4. There's 1 left.

- Joined
- Mar 16, 2016

- Messages
- 1,683

what do you mean by "over thinking things" ? so how can I relate to things?! or think about things? you mean there's no need to think more than as it's?! take thinks not deeply just as it's ?!

"point" in math is nothing, in other words doesn't have dimension, so I totally convinced with that ! but my problem is how can I imagine it? I mean if I'm solving a problem and I imagine a points , how can I imagine them? If I would imagine a point then I make it as it has a dimension, so how actually I imagine it? for instance lets take I have distance like this:

1------------------------------20 , and I want to divide it by half , in other words I will put a "point" on the half of that distance in other words 1--------------------*---------------------20 , so I imagine that point which divide the distance by half like this .. but if so then the point "*" has a dimension because as you see in the graph it has dimension ..so how can I imagine it? what's make me harder to understand the point is, how can imagine it and manipulate it on math?! for example I try to imagine a point in a black circle, but if I take a point on he black circle , then the black circle would have a point of "empty-white" so it's also wrong analogues because it makes a point with dimension .. !! any help how can I imagine point over math?

If you divided the line into 2 segments 10 each, how long is the "point"? 20 - 10 - 10 = 0.If I would imagine a point then I make it as it has a dimension, so how actually I imagine it? for instance lets take I have distance like this:

1------------------------------20 , and I want to divide it by half , in other words I will put a "point" on the half of that distance in other words 1--------------------*---------------------20 , so I imagine that point which divide the distance by half like this .. but if so then the point "*" has a dimension because as you see in the graph it has dimension ..so how can I imagine it?

You can draw the point however you like, it's still 0 size.

- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015

- Messages
- 1,990

The * is not the actual point; it is only your representation of it. (Nobody can draw an actual mathematical point because it's not a real object.)... I imagine that point which divide the distance by half like this ...

1--------------------*---------------------20

... but if so then the point "*" has a dimension because as you see in the graph it has dimension ...

You never replied to my question, from about two months ago: What is the smallest positive Real number?

lets assume I have bottle, its size 2L so the maximum height signed as "-20" (be careful that's " - " isn't menus it's just a line)

I want to calculate the amount between the maximum height of the bottle to the half of the bottle, which it's 0.5*2L=L .

So what should I do is, 2L-L=L ! all is fine, but once again what about the line L itself , I mean the line at height L ,am I subtract it also from 2L?!

the line at height L I mean that over this line there's height L, so since I do 2L-L am I subtract the line itself of height L also?!

thanks

Wasn't it resolved last time this came up?but once again what about the line L itself

- Joined
- Jun 29, 2019

- Messages
- 2

If it helps, think of sec/sec as 1 sec/1 sec. It does not change the problem.

but I dont understand this, because max means the greatest point upon the points we have, but we have 5 ,5 so we don't have maximum point because none of two points (5,5) greater than each other, so the max() should return 0 and not 5 because the two points are not greater than each other , they are equal, so we have no greater one than the other one ... so the max should return 0 ..but sounds it's wrong as the video I watched for learning .. so anyone can help how can I define the max function?

thanks alot guys!!

The min function on a set of numbers returns the

As usual, your confusion arises because you do not pay careful attention to what things mean.

- Joined
- Jan 29, 2005

- Messages
- 8,954

You always like a formula. Well the max & min functions are well defined.Hi guys, I'm so confused about max of two points that they are the same,

I mean if I have max(5,5) => 5 but I dont understand this, because max means the greatest point upon the points we have

\(\displaystyle \large{\max\{a,b\}=\dfrac{|a+b|+|a-b|}{2}~\&~\min\{a,b\}=\dfrac{|a+b|-|a-b|}{2}}\)

Here are some to practice on:

\(\displaystyle \max\{1,-2\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \min\{1,-2\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \max\{5,5\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \min\{5,5\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \min\{-5,-5\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \max\{3,-3\}=~?\)

\(\displaystyle \min\{3,-3\}=~?\)

- Joined
- Nov 12, 2017

- Messages
- 5,522

Please reread the answers there.

In English, the word "largest" can be taken to suggest there are more than one (in fact, maybe more than two) different values. But in math, we define it very simply, as the member of the set that is no less than any member of the set. This applies to any size set, and does not depend on the values being different.

In any language community (such as math), you just accept the definition that people use. This is part of being human. It is pathological to do otherwise.

if I have : 5---------------6-------------7 which "---------" is straight line , if I want the distance between 5 and 6 then I do 6-5 =1 but now if I want the distance between 6 and 7 then I do 7-6-epsilon because we already calculated the point of 6 in the distance between 6-5 .. but in math is telling me that distance between 7 and 6 is 7-6 without epsilon .. I mean without - epsilon, what's going on exactly? why we are considering the point 6 twice in distance between 5-6 and between 6-7 ? it really makes it hard for me ..I need to grasp the concept ..how the theoretical concepts define the idea of " point "?! thanks alot !

I claim if we calculated the point of 6 in distance 6-5 because we calculated the amount of distance between 6-5 , then we must wipe the point of 6 off in calculating the distance between 6-7 ! and that's because we already calculated the point of 6 in distance between 5-6 .. but apparently I'm wrong .. I don't know why any help?! maybe I define a point in a wrong way?! how math define point ?