Difference between revisions of "Talk:1230: Polar/Cartesian"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Heh.  Schroedinger's graph.  Simultaneously 100% certainty of being Cartesian and 100% certainty of being Polar. [[Special:Contributions/12.117.213.34|12.117.213.34]] 09:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 
Heh.  Schroedinger's graph.  Simultaneously 100% certainty of being Cartesian and 100% certainty of being Polar. [[Special:Contributions/12.117.213.34|12.117.213.34]] 09:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
Isn't this a Polar graph?  If it's a Cartesian, doesn't it end at 0%?  As the line goes farther to the right, more time has passed instead of the "certainty" changing. --Clayton [[Special:Contributions/12.202.74.87|12.202.74.87]] 14:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
  
 
If you take into account [[833]], this graph shows certainty that you are interpreting it correctly. --[[User:DiEvAl|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl|talk]]) 09:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 
If you take into account [[833]], this graph shows certainty that you are interpreting it correctly. --[[User:DiEvAl|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl|talk]]) 09:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:18, 26 June 2013

Heh. Schroedinger's graph. Simultaneously 100% certainty of being Cartesian and 100% certainty of being Polar. 12.117.213.34 09:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Isn't this a Polar graph? If it's a Cartesian, doesn't it end at 0%? As the line goes farther to the right, more time has passed instead of the "certainty" changing. --Clayton 12.202.74.87 14:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

If you take into account 833, this graph shows certainty that you are interpreting it correctly. --DiEvAl (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The ambiguity is due to the unlabelled x-axis. --Prooffreader (talk) 10:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The title text protip is really only applicable to 2 axes continuous graphes, unless you count ants being added or flicked away by the user as discontinuities. 24.247.120.53 13:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)ProfKrueger