@[email protected] to Lord of the [email protected]English • 8 months agoA million more well on the wayaussie.zoneimagemessage-square15fedilinkarrow-up1553arrow-down116
arrow-up1537arrow-down1imageA million more well on the wayaussie.zone@[email protected] to Lord of the [email protected]English • 8 months agomessage-square15fedilink
minus-squareenkerslinkEnglish20•edit-28 months ago therefore we cannot assume that 6001 is exactly half of the total. Correct, all we can deduce is the bounds: Let x be the number of spears hoped for. 6000 < x/2 < 6002 12000 < x < 12004 Edit: fixed error
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish13•8 months agoLess than half and more than half imply strict inequality, so 6000 < x/2 < 6002, so 12001 <= x <= 12003
minus-squareenkerslinkEnglish7•edit-28 months agoYou’re absolutely correct, it should be “<”. Since he wished for such an odd number, I wouldn’t constrain x to integers though. Maybe he wished for “more than twelve thousand spears”?
Correct, all we can deduce is the bounds:
Let x be the number of spears hoped for.
6000 < x/2 < 6002
12000 < x < 12004
Edit: fixed error
Less than half and more than half imply strict inequality, so 6000 < x/2 < 6002, so 12001 <= x <= 12003
You’re absolutely correct, it should be “<”. Since he wished for such an odd number, I wouldn’t constrain x to integers though. Maybe he wished for “more than twelve thousand spears”?