• Darkassassin07
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I said ONE triangle turned into a triforce is 5 times as many triangles as you started with.

    Regardless of which equation you use, that is true. Your really that pissed off I showed the simpler equation for a single instance??

    I explicitly stated the rule for following equations; to show, regardless, that it’s incorrect.

    Nothing I have said is untrue. You’re just being a pedantic asshole.

    • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Nothing I have said is untrue. You’re just being a pedantic asshole.

      Like you in your first comment…? Lmfao. You aren’t the quickest one are you?

      You explicitly stated two equations, not “the rule” thats the issue dude… come on haha how can you say it’s “the rule” and provide two different ones…? That would be wrong on any test/assignment.

      You are being pedantic, and I saw that you made a folly that would be marked wrong on any assignment, so I was playfully calling you out.

      And then you went and made an idiot out of yourself :)

      • Darkassassin07
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Taking a triangle and making it into a tri-force = 5 times as many triangles, not 3.

        Correct. 1 * 5 = 5. Which is also equivalent to 1*3+2, though simpler.

        Then taking that and making it into further ti-forces is x3+2

        Correct.

        You’ve failed your math assignment.

        Correct. The above image is not 3x as many triangles as the previous post.

        So once again, which part of this is wrong?

        What a fucked up way to explain a simple thing, while making yourself wrong at the same time…

        Just because I typed it differently than you would have doesn’t make the math suddenly wrong. I never said I was defining rules. Nor trying to narrow them down to a single rule. That was entirely your initiative.

        I was simply showing how far away from “x3” it was; which in the first instance “x5” illustrates that point better.

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Saying they are off by a factor of 2x is way to make something seem worse than it actually is, it’s off by 2 units… not 2 factors…

          I’m sorry you can’t explain things properly, and make them more complicated than they have to be, while making yourself wrong at the same time…