Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here is a business problem--One I actually had to do:
The average number of times computer programming work estimates were correct was 50%.
Since this was causing very high losses to the computer programming company I was working for, the error rate had to be reduced significantly. But how.
One set of facts I did have were the following:
1. Most optimistic estimates
2. Most pessimistic estimates
3. Most likely estimates
4. Acutal results.
5. A measurment (function points) of the complexity of each programming effort)
6. The salary of each programmer.
How could I have solved this without use of algebra? Apparently the problem was too difficult for "common sense". If I just used "common sense" the soltion to this problem would never have been found. How would you solve this problem?
Having personally been in the position of getting the programming done in a time frame posted by someone in management that didn't know crap about programming here is how I would figure it out:
1. Tell management to shut the Hell up.
2. Ask the programmers how long it will take to get the project done.
3. Wait for management to add a dozen more "must-have" features to the project.
4. Tell management to shut the Hell up.
5. Ask the programmers how long it will take to add these features.
6. Add 6 months to this estimate.
7. Offer a nice bonus to the programmers to get it done on time. This actually works.
8. Return to step 3.
I'm sure there is some algebra in there somewhere...
Actually I have a better non-algebra answer. People who are this concerned about the size of their TV screen need to get a life. Algebra should be the least of their concerns.
Always bad to make assumptions. I didn't try cause I didn't care. Math is actually my best subject. I've completed five graduate level statistics classes and have worked with numbers in my job for quite some time.
But I am highly sympathetic to the viewpoint that we teach a lot more math in school than what the average person needs to get by.
Some time ago? Dude, I was taking Algebra in Junior high in 1962.
Yeah, 88 to 92. The State of California changed the requirements in 2003. All I said was that my high school required one year of math with the possibility of excluding algebra, so it would be possible for someone to have graduated from my high school (and state, too, I suppose) without taking algebra (or anything higher). I never said that I didn't take algebra in high school.
You have a square and x is the length and the width is 6 feet more than the length...well when you measured the width why didnt you measure the length too??? Dumbass.
#1 - Isn't that geometry?
#2 - The question, as you wrote it, is unsolvable. In a square, length = width by definition, therefore it is impossible for length < width. The "dumbass" is whoever told you that. If it truly is a square, why would you measure both the length & width, if they're the same? Sounds like a waste of time, not to mention the wrong answer. You're fired. (channeling a supervisor here)
What most of you aren't getting is that it isn't necessarily dealing with a problem like: find x if x^2*y+4=56. One of the most beneficial things about algebra is that it teaches you how to approach a problem logically and come up with an answer. Besides, it's one of the building blocks that you use if you choose to go on in math (hence why it's usually a lower-level course). We're not exactly talking about multivariate calculus here.
Algebra is everywhere. But unless you are crunching numbers you will probably never notice it. You may even do some basic form of Algebra and never know it.
As an engineer I have taken tons of Algebra and higher level maths that all require the use of Algebra.
But what is funny is that I am working in my field and rarely use it. In fact I could safely say that I might use it once every 6 months for some basic equation. To be honest I could have made it through most of my career without knowing any. Doesn't mean I shouldn't have a basic undersdtanding of it.
I took algebra in High school and didn't do so well. Ended up in some basic classes so I could graduate. It was not required. And years later I had to retake it all because I couldn't rememeber anything. Unfortunately schools tend to teach you theory with no real world applications. 99% of algebra I could have done without for my current career.
Yeah, 88 to 92. The State of California changed the requirements in 2003. All I said was that my high school required one year of math with the possibility of excluding algebra, so it would be possible for someone to have graduated from my high school (and state, too, I suppose) without taking algebra (or anything higher). I never said that I didn't take algebra in high school.
My junior high offered algebra, too.
I don't understand how someone could do well enough on the math portion of the SAT to get into college without having taken algebra. I took some algebra in third grade in a gifted program, and then after we moved took it again in 8th grade, which was a year ahead - all but the LD students took it in 9th grade.
Is it useful? It's not as though I'm doing quadratic equations at work or anything, but it's hard to imagine not knowing the basics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
