I do maths and my gf knows it. Christmas is coming soon and I'm sending her a postcard since we live apart from each other.
I plan to give her a few problems where the answer can be turned into a phrase. Do you have any cute easy problems that you like to give people who aren't that well versed in maths?
I was thinking of for example finding some math olympiad problems for 4th graders or something but I can't find any.
>>7733887
>we live apart from each other.
Have fun being cucked.
>>7733887
She's absolutely cheating on you.
is P = NP?
>>7733887
>. Do you have any cute easy problems that you like to give people who aren't that well versed in maths?
Don't fucking do it, you'll overestimate her and she'll feel like you're mocking her.
Maths is your thing, not her's (I assume).
>>7733887
She'll just show it to her lover and they'll both laugh at how much of an autistic boring nerd you are. And then he cums a huge load into her pussy. Do you really think women care about math? Please don't tell me you're actually that autistic.
>>7733920
This
It would be cute if it were the reverse
Old math contests: http://www.cemc.uwaterloo.ca/contests/past_contests.html
Most of the problems are uninteresting, but sometimes you get problems like pic related, which could be turned into what you want.
My suggestion is to make a problem where letters have values assigned to them and must be sorted into a magic square. Once the square is made, it should spell your message. Make them look like Scrabble tiles, A_5, A_9, B_1, C_14, ...
For bonus marks, get some blank tiles and make them into actual, physical things rather than a problem to work out on paper.
f(cuck) = you
f'(cuck) = 0 , (you've been constantly a cuck)
>>7733893
>>7733894
>>7733928
>>7733940
What's with this stupid meme I keep getting? I really wonder if this is usually just a single thread.
>>7733920
Highly unlikely she'd feel like I was mocking her. If she did, I'd mock her for that.
I'm trying to get some problems first, if it turns out it doesn't look fun I'll scrap the idea. They don't have to be tough though, they could even include a sudoku or sth.
>>7733953
Damn... Thanks! Those are some great ideas! (and source!)
>>7733980
>I really wonder if this is usually just a single guy spamming the same thread.
>>7733953
Great problem, anon! I got choice E, triangle/circle, as my answer. Let's see what you guys get and we can talk about the problem
>>7733980
Ideas for presents for other people: the one thing I am good at. Now I go to brave the hordes at the mall and struggle to find half-decent gifts for the people I actually know, all of which will be received with a flat, "Oh, thanks... that's cool," or an overly cheerful, "I love iiiit. Thank youuuu," after which they will never be mentioned again.
Have fun, dude... your girl will appreciate the effort you put into it, even if the puzzle itself isn't great.
>>7733953
So here's an idea for this one... you can make similar balances with letters instead of shapes, and ask her to order the letters according to their weight. Write the letters into the row of a table.
Then do this again a few times, and after solving all the rows, she can read downward column by column to see your message.
>>7733887
cuck
>>7733887
Unfortunately, as other posters have mentioned women typically meet anything more mechanistically abstract with the utmost disinterest. You know know her though, we don't. It really depends, and depends on you as well.
I'm a bit whacked / burnt out, myself. So any female with which there is repeated interaction tends to be more apt to think in a compatible way. I can call a house a machine, and they might discuss it. But when it comes to constructing something for someone to decode, even I'd be hesitant. Movies and your own fantasies rarely reflect how anything likely pans out, it's just one possibility (with relatively low probability), most people aren't into deciphering or decoding things to get some cutesy message that someone could have just written.
If you're into that, make it into a game. Don't do it suddenly as a special event though.
>>7733976
f(cuck) = 0(cuck) + you
There are 0 cucks in your equation.
>>7733980
>What's with this stupid meme I keep getting?
After the great triggering, /pol/ started moving out and spreading their petty insecurities to other boards. It's not one guy, it's a ton of maladjusted twenty somethings who are frustrated they can't into hookup culture.
>>7733953
This got my attention and I'm working as a linear algebra problem atm.
>>7734169
did the same thing. what did you get?
>>7734178
The answer given by >>7734015 to the problem >>7733953 is incorrect. The correct answer is D.
The FIRST THREE BALANCED SCALES in the problem given above, can be interpreted as a system of three linear equations in four unknowns, each of which (upon rearrangement) is equal to zero. Moreover, you can simply use each symbol as the algebraic symbol to represent a given column. Gaussian elimination gives a very simple arithmetic relationship of the weights of the above objects. Two equivalent conventions are given below, I use the former to solve.
"Circle" - one fourth weight (or, "one").
"Diamond" - two fourths weight (or, "two").
"Triangle" - three fourths weight (or, "three").
"Square" - four fourths weight (or, "four").
As you can see, this is consistent with the problem's statement. Triangle plus circle adds up to 1 (equal to square), Triangle is the same as diamond plus circle (three fourths), and diamond-plus-triangle adds up to the same as circle-plus-square (five fourths).
So, circle-plus-diamond-plus-triangle is six-fourths, in my usage. And among the five multiple choices, only D, Square-plus-diamond, is also equal to six-fourths.
>>7734242
well I'm glad I got it right
>>7734165
Have you been around millennial women anon? Most will cuck you at some point and especially if they are in a long term relationship.
>>7734242
Correct. For a fuller solution:
For simplicity, Let:
a=triangle
b=circle
c=square
d=diamond
Note that the system of equations can be expressed as:
a+b=c
a=b+d
a+d=b+c
and we want to know: b+d+a= ???
Observe that:
a+b-c=0
a-b-d=0
a-b-c+d=0
Generating a matrix and using gaussian elimination:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=gaussian+elimination%7B%7B1%2C+1%2C+-1%2C+0%7D%2C+%7B1%2C+-1%2C+0%2C+-1%7D%2C+%7B1%2C+-1%2C+-1%2C+1%7D%7D
Thus, we get:
a-(3/2)d=0
b-(1/2)d=0
c-2d=0
Now, consider what we are looking for:
b+d+a=(1/2)d+d+(3/2)d=3d
In other words, we are looking for something that is equal to the weight of 3 diamonds.
Let's consider the original equations to get an expression of d in other terms:
d=(a-b) and d=(b+c-a)
Note that d+d+d=(a-b)+(a-b)+(b+c-a)=(a-b)+c=d+c
Thus, a diamond and a square fit the bill.
>>7733953
>>7734178
>>7734242
All you need to see is a cursory observation to get the answer. The top right and bottom left scales are completely irrelevant.
The top left scale shows that circle and triangle equal square, and the lower right scale also has a circle and triangle on the left side. Therefore, you can put a square on the right side. All that's left is the diamond, and the weight of the diamond equals itself, so you get a square and a diamond for the bottom left scale, or D.
>>7734019
Exactly, even if it isn't great I think she'll appreciate it. Thanks. Have a good Christmas too.
>>7734015
The correct answer is D: square+diamond, because square=triangle+circle, and diamond=diamond. It is a scale so these objects have mass that can be added, so therefore square+diamond=triangle+diamond+circle because (triangle+circle)+diamond=triangle+diamond+circle.
>>7733920
this desu. its kinda like buying her lingerie. do something SHE would like
t. grill
Report all cuck threads. Block all cucks.
Fucking low test faggot go away.
>math
>getting cucked
Nothing to see here, folks.
>>7733887
tell her to prove something by induction
something easy
lol jk this wont work unless you gave a strong hint
>>7734305
It's your trust issue, not mine.
>>7733887
Is this ok?
>>7734764
That could be read as: sam+e^(yr^2)m=x
