BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > 47 training minutes?

47 training minutes?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
187726.10 in reply to 187726.9
Date: 6/25/2011 2:21:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
345345
I don't want to be the nerd or anything... but exponential in maths is really like....

2^48=281474976710656
2^47=140737488355328

Thus => 50%. That is was exponential really means

But I seriously doubt that this is the case, and the difference between 47 and 48 is more like 5-10%, so your guess should be right:)

This Post:
00
187726.11 in reply to 187726.10
Date: 6/25/2011 3:01:28 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
isn't exponential everything with an exponential funktion "^"

This Post:
00
187726.12 in reply to 187726.11
Date: 6/25/2011 3:23:14 AM
Phoenix_Suns
III.5
Overall Posts Rated:
176176
isn't exponential everything with an exponential funktion "^"


That´s how WE learn it in Germany. But maybe we are just taught wrong.

This Post:
00
187726.13 in reply to 187726.11
Date: 6/25/2011 3:29:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
345345
That´s how WE learn it in Germany. But maybe we are just taught wrong.

So, what Romanians are idiots? please stop right there


isn't exponential everything with an exponential funktion "^"


well, yeah, but your supposed to exponentiate the same base, not a different base. I'm not sure what are the math terms in English for this, but if you put like Arthur said:

48^2 = 2304

47^2 = 2209

it's a different function, it's like calling f(x) and g(x)
instead what i said was:

2^48=281474976710656
2^47=140737488355328


f(47) and f(48). Get it, now? This is what I was trying to say. I agree that some may disagree with me, but never mock my intelligence, no one should be aloud to do that.

This Post:
00
187726.14 in reply to 187726.13
Date: 6/25/2011 3:54:16 AM
Phoenix_Suns
III.5
Overall Posts Rated:
176176
It was meant funny. Sorry if you feel offended by that.

I just wanted to point out, that exponential functions can vary a lot and bring out infinite results, depending on how it is built.
No offense against anyone... Relax please.

Last edited by Thunder Dan at 6/25/2011 3:54:34 AM

This Post:
00
187726.15 in reply to 187726.14
Date: 6/25/2011 4:32:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
345345
It felt offensive, and I was a bit iffy to begin with, so I also apologize on my part:) The exp functions can vary quite a lot, there's no way other than experimenting, to know the exact numbers

This Post:
11
187726.16 in reply to 187726.9
Date: 6/25/2011 7:06:50 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2828
N^c (where c is a constant) is polynomial..
c^N is exponential..

a simple equation:
c^48 = 100 /log
48logc = log100
c~1.1007

now for c=1.1 we have:
1.1007^48 ~100
1.1007^47 ~ 90.87

however, the constant can have whatever value, and then they can scale it to 100%..
for example, if c were 1.15, then:
1.15^48 = 819.4
1.15^47 = 712.52

and 712.52/819.3 ~ 87%..

This Post:
00
187726.17 in reply to 187726.12
Date: 6/25/2011 7:38:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
Lol. Mathematics is the same on whole world (and even universe). And therefore if we meet extraterrestrial civilization then our first contact will be based on mathematics, to show that human are intelligent form of life ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_function
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynomial_function

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_function

This Post:
00
187726.18 in reply to 187726.16
Date: 6/25/2011 9:26:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
147147
N^c (where c is a constant) is polynomial..
c^N is exponential..

a simple equation:
c^48 = 100 /log
48logc = log100
c~1.1007

now for c=1.1 we have:
1.1007^48 ~100
1.1007^47 ~ 90.87

however, the constant can have whatever value, and then they can scale it to 100%..
for example, if c were 1.15, then:
1.15^48 = 819.4
1.15^47 = 712.52

and 712.52/819.3 ~ 87%..



Beautiful math. So 47 minutes should get you between 87-95% of full training.

And if the model is exponential - which is impossible to know for sure - then anything less than 48+ minutes is pretty damaging.

By your model, 40 minutes only gives you 46% of full training.

This Post:
00
187726.19 in reply to 187726.18
Date: 6/25/2011 9:32:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
but it could be also more slightly choosing an small N like 1.0001, or making the difference smaller through an constant affecting t.

c_1^(t*c_2) && c_2 <1
but you could make it also worse with the same tricks, in a different direction.

This Post:
00
187726.20 in reply to 187726.19
Date: 6/25/2011 9:45:33 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
147147
You're right, without knowing the constant this is all worthless conjecture.

However, Fenris' equation is the most mathematically efficient. His equation penalizes pretty harshly for not meeting the full 48 minutes, though, so maybe the constant is lower?

As I said at the beginning, worthless conjecture.........

Advertisement