888
24 02 2008Thinking of the metaphorical meaning of The Enigma of Amigara Fault, suicide and such jump to mind. I couldn’t help thinking of Lain being my “hole” - it was perfectly tailored to bring out all my psychological insecurities and quirks, and it did. Interestingly, teachers like Mr Barker, Mr Rokison and Mr Smith have only known me since my shift into mediocrity and insanity, and I think Mr Motion is beginning to understand that my mental arithmetic is sluggish at best. Rambling, rambling, rambling. I think my theme of happy/sad is linked to bipolar disorder or at least mania.
I was thinking about trying to speed up my mental maths: if you know your squares up to 20, you could do something like this:
Input: multiply a and b.
Check whether a mod 2 = b mod 2 (i.e. are they both odd or both even? This isn’t necessary but is a vestige of this retardation’s origin in my mental maths crazy stuff - I know a bunch of n2s for ns up to 20 and then some randomers like 25 and some powers of two because of computing jigga.)
If so, use the thing. Using some (like going backward to difference of two squares).
ab = ((a+b)/2-(a+b)/2+a)((a+b)/2+(a+b)/2-a) = ((a+b)/2)2 - (a - (a+b)/2)2
So ab = (mean - distanceToMean)(mean + distanceToMean) = mean2 - distanceToMean2. Yeah.
Hmm. So like: 12 x 14?
- 12 + 14 = 26
- 26/2 = 13
- 132 (lookup, so only one operation, not the fat O(n2) number that multiplication usually takes) = 169
- 12-13 = -1
- (-1)2 = 1
- 169 - 1 = 168
Looks retarded but I actually find that easier than going 14 x 10 + 14 x 2 = 140 + 28 = 168. I’m not joking.
Maybe it becomes useful later?
17 x 23 = 202 - 32 = 391
As it pivots on square values and I only want to go up to 20, you can make other stuff:
11 x 29 = 202 - 92 = 319
So it’s “If both numbers are odd or both numbers are even*, their product is the mean squared minus half the distance between them (or the distance to the mean) squared.”
This is fun.
23 x 27 = 625 - 4 = 621. Pimping.
And stuff. Actually, maybe the reason I like this is not to do with number of operations but merely type of operation: I find multiplication difficult; I am an idiot. Addition and subtraction I also dislike but not as much as I dislike multiplication.
*I think I added this constraint so you only get whole numbers. Remember, I’m an idiot!
Having a lookup table of squares and doing this - any good for computational optimisation? MAYBE.
I ordered some of Nakaido Reichi’s music from OCS Books. When I went in there, they started talking Japanese at me - possibly because I was having a bad hair day. Thus, today I got my hair cut. That’s all.
I’m watching this in the hope of properly understanding quantum computing.
Notions of the “observer’s mind” remind me of Lain and obviously Plato’s allegory of the cave reminds me of The Matrix.
These tech talks are awesome. Google aren’t as bad as their (generally) fbugly [functional but ugly] UI design suggests: this is the real deal!
UPDATE: Seriously.
Pax
You don’t need the modulus when you just square it afterwards. otherwise cool.
lulz i am a jam donut
You still have one modulus that shouldn’t be there, it should be a square, so difference of two squares gives ((a+b)/2-(a+b)/2+a)((a+b)/2+(a+b)/2-a) = (a)(b).
Jigga shit. I couldn’t do a new factorisation but I made an expression for abc basically subbing in ab = a and c = b (you know?) into the other one, but with ab as the expanded jigga. So it’s some recursive biotch. It comes out to the retard image I just put on the end of that thing.