These are both certainly Terms of Degree 2.
They are not equalities. They are not the same Term.
The point I mean to highlight is the represention (for the purpose of
calculation).
16/32 is not 15/30 is not 8/16. An equivalence is 1/2. It should never be
mistaken for Expression Linear /Logarithmic.
The problem is in cases where you apply an equivalence simplification
improperly sequence wise.
You loss coherence of the expression, (which often leads to settling on on
approximation where resolution can be achieved).
This is what we think we are saying.
(17+45+65+71+5) -: (17+45+65+71+5)
1
This is what we are actually saying.
(17.36+45.24+65.87+71.20+5.00) -: (17+45+65+71+5)
0
Or worse
(17.99+45.99+65.99+71.99+5.99 ) -: (17+45+65+71+5)
0
In part, this is why the full representation should be favoured.
Particularly for unknown cases where it is common to reach for Infinities.
I am rambling now. Let me know if this is not clear.
Ak
On Wed., Jan. 4, 2023, 22:18 Raul Miller, <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 10:24 PM Ak O <akin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > File -> Wed Jan 4 03:40:07UTC 2023
> > The statement:
> > So, there's no difference in Degree 1 2 1 0 0 0 and 1 2 1...
> >
> > This is not correct. These should not be seen as equalities.
>
> That's an interesting perspective.
>
> It seems to me that both of these are polynomials of degree 2. If
> they should have different degrees, what degrees should they have? And
> how would this be consistent with the opening sentence at
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degree_of_a_polynomial#:
>
> "In mathematics, the degree of a polynomial is the highest of the
> degrees of the polynomial's monomials (individual terms) with non-zero
> coefficients."
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
