[MercedesK]

Nber: Idhi nade nyar mama....wacha siasa mob!

Labell: uuuh

Lily: umenyamaza tena?

Shida..

here we go..

so basically you are saying that you want to make a representation of the "problem" with the solution on the left hand side and the equations on the right hand side right?

I assume also that since we already know the solutions (contained in Rabell's statement) then all that is left is to find out what the coefficients of the variables are in the right hand side right? We should be careful not to add any new information while doing this.

The variables that I consider to be of importance in this equation are (I may have renamed the variables so let me know):

1. What Rabell really knows -X
2. What Juma/We really know - Y
3. The Truth :) -Z
4. What Rabell thinks Juma knows.-A
5. What Juma/We think Rabell knows. -B

Hold on let a sec..

[MercedesK]

mmmh..I realize that I will totally go off tangent if I decide to rewrite what you wrote in a new post so let me annote on your initial sheet...

Perhaps we could modify it as
>x+y=z to make it closer to
>Rabell’s , which can be reduced to
>a multi-dimensional matrix with
>one’s and zero’s as elements
>(“read coefficients) of the
>multi-variables. That is very
>advantageous because its sparsity in the
>numerical grid representation can
>effectively be used for optimization.

aha
>avoid having infinite solution, we may
>set up the boundary conditions or
>“constrains”, which now
>brings me back to MercK’s
>suggestion.

okay
>>>>>>>>>>>>


>Ok, let us start by breaking this puzzle
>into pieces.
>I -
>know that
>You
>don’t know
>And
>I
>know that
>You
>don’t know that
>I
>know

DAYUM - as in now that im reading it it makes sense but how the hell did you come up with that way of breaking it down?

>With I and Y standing for I and You
>respectively, know being a constant and
>-know (negative know) to negate the
>knowing. Note that –know and know
>are two separate variables connected
>only with negative. “And”
>is a multiplicative connector in
>probability theory.
>
>@MercK: are we still together?

Dude..you are obviously high-tech. I think I get you...except on the dimensionality of the matrix. Damn..you know im thinking deeper at what you just modelled and I gotta give it up to you, that was some DEEP thinking.
Okay what I have is this..

matrixes

A.B = C

A = elements are the constants I and YOU
B = elements are the variables know and -know
C = elements relating to what there is to know/some form of truth

and you are relating the AND probabilistically so that each scenario covers all possibilities right?
I dont know if this is the way to introduce the probabilistic part but let P be the probability connector matrix:

P.A.B. = C?
damn..you have no idea how much you have jazzed me yaani....thats some original stuff....hey..if my assumptions about ABC are correct please proceed I would love to see how you bring in the probabilities. of course im just being lazy here :)

[Lily]

As I sit back and become the student I have a question...

So let me try and understand this...

x = I ,You (A)

y = know, -know (B)

z = what there is to know (C)

P = AND (multiplicative connector)

@MercK...I'd like to know how you fitted "P" into the equation and why did you use P.x.y = z instead of P(x+y) = z

@Shidanyingi...could you pliz explain to me the "AND is a multiplicative connector in
probability theory" part. You lost me on that one.

And they said I wouldn't learn anything in Mashada...:D


**When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it.**

[shidanyingi]

Jesus doesn’t use logic and complex mathematics: <<<<<<<<<<
......and this is supposedly the most educated MBA Mashadite ? Some people are just dumb.

===============================================

Christians believe that Jesus is related to Love.
Suppose we have x to represent Jesus and Y to represent Love then

x=y

what this means is that the coefficient of x is the same as the coefficient of y while x and y are totally different entities.

It is easily seen that y/x=1. In essence Jesus and Love are one thing.

[MercedesK]

Shida hehehee....lawdy!

Lily: P(x+y) = z

you see if you expand that out you will end up with results that look like
P(I) + P(Know) = P (some element of truth)

you want a scenario like
P(1 know) + P(he knows/does not know etc) = P (some truth function/ subset)

right?

But yeah I too am not too sure as to how the P matrix is gonna play in.

[Labell]

THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT TO MUCH OF EDUCATION DOES TO AN INDIVIDUAL.IT MAKES MATTERS EVEN MORE COMPLICATED AND HARD TO SUM-UP.

WITH THE SIMPLIFIED LIFE THAT AM LIVING MY GOALS ARE MORE CLEARER AND MUCH MORE EASY TO INTERPRET.

[Big G]

what is that saying that goes something like "the best things in life are the simplest"... u guys have somad so much kweli mpaka u have zidid.... try 2 look at this at a different angle... and not a mathematical one... but a simpler, non-mathematical point of view.. it works out... u guys stop seeing words as numbers and see them as letters..

u guys have somad so much am sure u could bcome like another proffesor in my uni whom calculated the probablity that God exists...

"THE HARSH REALITIES OF LIFE HIT ME AFTER I SM0KE"

[Big G]

Merck sema... wacha ku potea like that..

[shidanyingi]

@Lily:

If I used multiplication operator, would it make any difference?

Now to the P matrix:

Under our present circumstance, the matrix P should play a role of transforming a function (x+y, actually I still think this should be A.B or x.y to take care of AND) to a different one but retaining its initial properties. In matrix notation, we could easily refer to this matrix P as a unitary operator. Let Q be the inverse of P such that PQ=1

and let f=A.B

Therefore from MercK’s P(A.B) = C we get
Pf=C
Now we can have PfQ=CQ, but CQ=C (i.e. the transformed truth is still truth)

RHS (right hand side)
= You AND I know

This has been diagonalized by the Unitary matrix to one that contains only 1’s as the product matrix. I.e. Probability that a single event is occurring within one possibility is always there.

Aaaahuh,…so if both You and I know then there is some elements of truth?

Let me go for some more coffee....

[Labell]

AT THE RATE AT WHICH THIS IS HEADED TO ,AM FORCED TO PULL OUT MY LOGARITHM REFERENCE BOOK AT THIS TIME.ON THE OTHER HAND, IT SEEMS LIKE MY GRAPHING CALC IS READING SOME INFINITE VARIABLES, SO SHIDAMOB,MERC AND LILLY THAT GIVES Y'ALL NO OPTION BUT TO CRAB YOUR PENS AND PAPER AND LETS DO THE DAMN THANG!.