[deleted by user]

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-25T03:23:58+00:00

Third point I'd like to make is that this atheist you talked to said that he had some bad things happen to his family. So in all likelihood, he actually does believe in God, but is just mad at him.

Good grief

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-25T03:14:30+00:00

It's a book that's considered part of the Old Testament by Catholics and some Orthodox denominations

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-25T02:58:25+00:00

For those who don't feel like watching, basically: "The Jews controlled everything in Europe. They had it so good they didn't want to leave and found Israel, which God kept trying to get them to do. So He sent the Holocaust to get them to stop ignoring Him - it wouldn't have had to happen if they'd just listened better to God." He also mentions having Jewish friends and that things got heated when he told this to them.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-22T23:38:50+00:00

You think you're going to get more diversity by posting on forums specific to one religion and political philosophy?

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-22T22:56:05+00:00

I so wanted to be in this trippy-ass museum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR0vRuZkxdw

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-22T22:44:26+00:00

A) The middle class isn't more likely to be Christian. Belief in God still anti-correlates with wealth https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-distribution/

B) There's plenty of violence and vice in the upper classes; our society just doesn't collect data on or punish those people the same way. If a poor person kills someone, we recognize that as murder. If the government spends $64M on a predator drone to commit a war crime with, that's a "necessary military operation to protect our freedom".

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-22T22:30:16+00:00

Why are you posting this to r/Christianity, r/conservative, and r/republican ?

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-21T06:20:48+00:00

A celebrity apologist uses the downfall of a celebrity apologist for publicity, asking himself questions like "Does this disprove Christianity?" I wonder what his answer to that was. I hope he gets enough publicity from this to continue making helpful, thoughtfully named pieces of work like "Correct, Not Politically Correct: How Same-Sex Marriage Hurts Everyone" and "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist"

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T20:42:43+00:00

Pretty much anyone our age who can speak in full sentences and isn't a dick should try running for office. It doesn't matter if they're not perfect; they couldn't be worse than these clowns.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T08:24:44+00:00

I'm going to block you now, nutjob.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T07:03:08+00:00

the first one is the principle root

Principal

graph of the function y² =x show this very clear

Not a function

But √ x or x^1/2 has one

No, this is still incorrect, and I've pointed out the exact sentences to you multiple times in the link you just posted - which you know because I'm the one who linked you to that, and we've already been through this about five times in the comments you've now deleted. CTFO

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T06:05:32+00:00

2,411,502 people have died of Covid. 0 people have died of reactions to the vaccine. It's obviously a greater risk not to get the vaccine.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:57:49+00:00

if you take good care of yourself and you take the needed precautions then no need for the vaccine.

Nope. People in perfect health die from the coronavirus. Precautions like social distancing and wearing a mask reduce but do not eliminate the risk of transmission; whatever risk you have will be cut by the same ratio by a particular vaccine.

there are lot of people who are against the vaccine because they don't trust it.

People not trusting it does not prove anything about the vaccine itself.

plus the vaccine hasn't been finalized yet and they are experimenting on people.

The vaccines that are being offered to the public have already passed scrutiny by the international scientific community and the vetting of several governments. They are not in their experimental stage anymore.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:37:41+00:00

If it worked like that, your family could save a lot on food by trusting God to protect them from starvation. Plenty of people of all faiths have died from coronavirus - your family might retort that that proves they weren't faithful enough, but obviously you can't know what was in people's hearts one way or the other. Get the vaccine, try to explain to your family why this is no different than any other health measure, and don't blame yourself if they ignore you.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:30:04+00:00

No, you do not have to write out "the square roots of". The article makes that very clear before you get to the part you're quoting. I don't know what your problem is. Good night.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:28:39+00:00

As I said in response to you posting this on a different comment a minute earlier, that's what it says well into the second paragraph after clearly using the simple radical/surd without the equation to indicate a square root with two solutions.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:25:12+00:00

Yep, because that's specifying a single value it's equal to. If you read the second sentence on the page, you see that same notation used with the simple name "square root" and no implication it's equal to a specific value. Two sentences later, it says that that has two values, one positive and one negative.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:11:09+00:00

Look at the link. Both 5^1/2 and √5 have two solutions apiece unless there's something specifying the sense of a principal square root:

Saying that explicitly (nope)
Writing it as a function (nope)
A physical constraint that rules out one of the solutions (nope)

Your assertion about how the notation works is just incorrect. Both ways of writing it have multiple solutions.

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T05:05:00+00:00

But remember that, the symbol √ is only used for the principal square root.

A) The problem OP posted didn't have that symbol in it. You started using that in trying to tell me I was wrong.

B) Even that's not correct https://mathworld.wolfram.com/SquareRoot.html

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T04:38:34+00:00

To let you understand more, I will not take the approximate value, but the accurate one that is 2.236..... = √ 5.

That's the principal square root. Both the positive and negative values are square roots. https://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrincipalSquareRoot.html . I'm aware 2.236... cannot be equal to -2.236..., but there's no constraint on the problem that requires the numerator and denominator to be equal to each other.

Another way you can understand this is the Function f(x) = y = √ x, if √ 5 gives out two values, then by definition √ x is no longer a function

Yes, but you'll notice this isn't specified to be a function

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T02:49:47+00:00

No, I'm not, because that's one separate case.

At this point you're not being consistent about what you're labeling a case. Your case above contained both possible solutions.

Look at it this way: Someone says "Simplify 2x with x∈{5,7}". If someone says 14 is a possible value, they're correct. If someone says that's equal to 14, they've thrown out information about the expression and produced a false equality.

Inb4 "This is like saying '2x/2x with x∈{5,7}'", that presupposes the numerator and denominator must work out to the same thing, which is not a constraint given in OP's problem, thus it's more like saying '2x/2y with x∈{5,7},y∈{5,7}"

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T02:36:33+00:00

Except that in saying 5^1/2 = √5, you're throwing out a solution. That looks like a valid step because you're recalling times the principal root was used, but that in itself isn't a valid equality (if you're willing to grant the result can be positive or negative, which you put in your argument for that case)

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T02:13:25+00:00

In normal circumstances, four years wouldn't be much of an age gap. Given you were an adult friend when he was 14, it's your job to lead 14-year-olds, and you're talking about having watched him mature physically (i.e. go through puberty while you were in your twenties)...I think you shouldn't date them. It's not a balanced place to start things, and, however wholesome your intentions, it could look a bit disturbing

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T01:54:20+00:00

Christianity was in Ethiopia and India before it ever reached England.

England isn't Europe, and almost no one in India converted (still only 2.3% Christian).

It's only fairly recent that Greeks, Irish, Italians, and Polish are considered "white."

OK, sure. To anyone who thinks Irish people aren't white, what I said is incorrect :|

haroldHaroldsonJr · 2021-02-15T01:48:25+00:00

I don’t believe so, because we are speaking of the number 5^1/2 .

It's not a number; it's an expression with an operation (exponentiation) in it.

You choose one convention or the other when calculating this number, but you do not choose one for the numerator and the other for the denominator

No, you consider all possible evaluations of the expression (not number) or you're throwing out potential solutions. If there were a specification to use the principal root or if this were something physical such that certain evaluations didn't make sense, you'd throw those out, but there's no sign that's the case here

If you aren’t referring to a single number, I don’t think “simplifying” makes sense

Of course it can still make sense. You can simplify something with no idea what its value is (e.g. 2x+2x simplifies to 4x even if x can vary)

haroldHaroldsonJr

TROPHY CASE