greatest accomplishment mathmatically?

[MikeNaked]

Also, periods go between sentences, not commas.

(commas are the curl-i-que looking things - periods are the dot)

[IcyHotMonkey]

As I previously posted:

Quite simply if you give yourself and every player the same value:
1/140(0.00714) X 1/290(0.00344) X 1/215(0.00465) = .000000118 or 0.0000118% or 8,474,576:1

The chance of winning the Mega Millions lottery is 175,711,536:1

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...y-winner_x.htm
3,669,120,000,000:1 <--- better keep up your streak if you want a shot at top5.

(Notice the use of the enter button)

[VickreyAuction]

Without gravity we'd be floating in the [censored] air.

Newton >>>>>> Leibniz.

[Knives_Out]

Leibniz < Newton

[RunDownHouse]

Did OP even win any money for these things?

You know your thread completely sucks when it gets derailed by nerds fighting over Newton versus some other guy.

[flipdeadshot22]

[ QUOTE ]
"Agreed. Leibniz's treatment of classical mechanics is also the standard we pretty much still use. Both were brilliant thinkers, but Leibniz was truly on a different level."

I'm sorry this is so wrong I want to vomit. Newton's version of calculus is the one we use today. Newton discovered GRAVITY dude.

[/ QUOTE ]

But he didn't generalize his second law in the same way Leibniz had done. He simply gave a linear relation between the force exerted on an object and its acceleration (F=ma as you may remember from high school). Leibniz was insightful enough to generalize a force to simply be any time varying change in momentum (F=dp/dt.) This is the way we still think about forces today; Newton, surprisingly in his published principia, used very little calculus and relied more heavily on geometrical reasoning, which we do not use today. As far as Newton "discovering" gravity, the concept of gravity as a force falls out of Leibniz's F=dp/dt, as a consequence of any object under the influence of gravity having a nonzero value for dp/dt, automatically showing there MUST be a force to allow that to happen, we just call it "gravity."

[IronFly]

[ QUOTE ]
Did OP even win any money for these things?

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[ QUOTE ]
You know your thread completely sucks when it gets derailed by nerds fighting over Newton versus some other guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT, again!

[recondite7]

Question from the June 2000 LSAT

Historian: Leibniz, the seventeenth-century philosopher, published his version of calculus before Newton did. But then Newton revealed his private notebooks, which showed he had been using these ideas for at least a decade before Leibniz's publication. Newton also claimed that he had disclosed these ideas to Leibniz in a latter shortly before Leibniz's publication. Yet close examiniation of the letter shows that Newton's few cryptic remarks did not reveal anythiny important about calculus. Thus, Leibniz and Newton each independently discovered calculus.

Then it asked some question about it. Weird though because I was studying this today.

[acesovercole]

Greatest accomplishment mathematically? (I think we're talking statistics here...)

Comparing yourself to such greats as Harrington and/or Chan?

Terrible grammer, spelling, and punctuation?

You know, I think I have an even greater accomplishment for you to achieve.

1. Mapquest the directions to the nearest cliff.
2. Find your way there.
3. Jump off.

[acesovercole]

Agreed.