what about this square, it does not have an inverse

1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1

was about to fall asleep but then PROPOSITION:

• all magic squares are constant multitles (all numbers multiplied by a certain value), or shifted (all numbers added to by a certain value) of a very few variations of “base” magic squares this seems intuitively true by a sleepy deprived person at 1am, but if we can prove for these “base” squares, would that be the way to prove for the general case?

i.e. there r and infinite number of 1x1 magic squares, but there is only one case to deal with if we want to prove anytning about it

this is actually interesting, im currently on bed so im not writing a proof, but the rule for a 3x3 magic square of conseqetive numbers seemed to be (tested on one other example) that its inverse is 1/(3*middle number), the 3 could be the dimension of the square?

if this is true, this begs the questions:

• is it still true for squares of non conseqetive numbers?
• what happens when the square is 4x4 where a centre number doesnt exist

either way im gonna have a go at it when i wake up tmr, and im pinning this for being one of the coolests finds in the community

of course the website has something to do with lean

CTRL + P and article mode enters the chat

when i first showed this question to my friend, he told me that f(x) = 0 satisfies the condition. It is incredible that he said this without delay (i have not thought of that possibility at all), but at the same time it made me wanted to explode,

This challenge requires some specific knowledge on the topics, so if you have no idea how to approach this question, take a hint

If you found f but not in the specific format

No hints on the extension, you are on your own.

I’m sure there are many other ways to solve this, as it is a very open ended question. But anyways this is one of the favourite proof i’ve done

I’ve seen some people talking about the reason this song being pop is that all albums must have a radio song where almost everyone in the general public would accept. So my personal take while this song diverges from the classic LP style and the 2 previous songs, it doesn’t really count towards the theme of the upcoming album.

I hope this song is just a show of “we can do this style” rather than “we will be doikg this style from now on”, because I can already name a handful of pop songs with a similar style, and it kinda loses the point of LP.

when i first heard it i thought it sounded like mainstream pop and didnt like it, but after hearing it a few more times, i starting to like it a lot, maybe not to the level of emptiness machine, still it good a cool rhythm and it vibes

That would maybe make sense.

Yeah I think the claim might be true, but still there are probably ways to not hit a UN base of fixed location while carrying out an offensive.

This detail wasn’t here this morning, the article is gradually edited as more info surfaced. See the url for the original title.

proprietary, btw

Hint:

Hint

Solution: https://gmtex.siri.sh/fs/1/School/Extra/Maths/Qotd solutions/2024-08-04_extended-euclid.html

Hint:

Solution: https://gmtex.siri.sh/fs/1/School/Extra/Maths/Qotd solutions/2024-08-01_multiple-of-modulus.html

Hint:

Solution:

because I have never heard of this argument before, ever. most media’s stance on politics is “their party bad our party good”, but the “all the parties are pretty hypocritical” argument has never been explored properly, because its depressing and nobody likes it.

yup thats the intended solution, im not really familiar with taylor series yet, but maybe for a person who knows taylor series would be able to see it right away