>game softlocks if you have too low INT/PER

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Infinite probability.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      kys

      https://i.imgur.com/QPHkZ1h.png

      1/(inf2) ≈ 0

      proof:
      lim xinf ( 1/x2 ) = 0
      for retards: the closer you get to the 1/infinite, the closer you get to 0. 1/2 = 0.5, 1/3 = 0.33, 1/4 = 0.25, 1/5 = 0.20... 1/10 = 0.01, 1/100 = 0.001...

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        inf2 = infinite to the power of 2, a.k.a. infinite * infinite, wouldn't expect more from the loser incel coomer containment board

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There's there's more than one way to avoid the corners though, making it more like infinity/higher-infinity. So i'd assume there's an answer that isn't 0.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I finished high school and I still don't get it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That poster is a tard spouting gibberish, inf^2 vs inf is a meaningless distinction in analysis, they are both defined to be the same element of the extended reals, which doesn't matter because he doesn't understand the question.

          The answer is way more complex that 1/(inf2) I'd say.
          The square is of ANY orientation, so it CAN fall either on a corners or miss them completly)
          You would have to use integratio over x->,y-> and theta to solve this AND be careful of not counting squares twice.

          gets it

          I'll have a stab at modeling it a bit though.

          At '0' orientation (facing cardinal directions), the set of positions that don't cover the corner is of measure 0 (regardless of if a corner coinciding counts as 'coverage').

          At PI/4 orientation (45 degrees), the distance you could move a given square in the x and y axis respectively without covering a corner is sqrt(2)-1 which I believe can be generalized to sqrt(2)*cos(PI/4-theta)-1 [where the angle theta ranges from 0 to PI/4]

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The answer is way more complex that 1/(inf2) I'd say.
        The square is of ANY orientation, so it CAN fall either on a corners or miss them completly)
        You would have to use integratio over x->,y-> and theta to solve this AND be careful of not counting squares twice.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Here's a image for what I am talking about

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            (Forgot the angle)

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              This is very similar to another question ive seen, I wonder if its reducible. The answer to that one was 1/π oddly enough.

              This is gonna be an ugly as fuck triple integral, probably some nastly trig in there too. Theta on the outside, then X and Y. At 0 and 90 angle, odds are exactly zero. I think it maximizes at 45°.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think I can reduce it to a single integral with a single parameter (the angle), I'm not sure if I've done it correctly though.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So are you saying the square can never fall like pic related?

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My dumbass was picturing a Boeing 747 with the missing texture grid applied

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'm glad I'm not the only one, that was very confusing.
      >What kind of plane
      >On the bottom or the top?
      >If you drop it on the top of the fuselage does it count as also covering a corner on the bottom?

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    0%

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The answer to this question relies completely on what the resolution and distance between the smallest possible coordinates within the squares are.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how dense is the material because you can drop the tile on the side and it can just pin to the floor like a shuriken

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The probability of not placing a piece on a corner tile is (n^2)-4/n^2, where n is the side length. As side length approaches infinity, this probability approaches 1/1.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there are no corners in infinite planes, so 0%

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Corners of the square on the pattern, not corner of the plane

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    50/50

    either it does or it doesnt

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tending to zero? It's possible, but there is no finite number of possible positions and orientations to calculate

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is this asking about the corner squares of the plane or the corners of each square in the plane?

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    99,999999999999999999999999999999% I think

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      (me)
      Ho shit I didn't understand the question. I though the corners as in the corners of the planes and not the squares.
      The additional unit (lets call it x) not covering one of the squares imply that x must cover one of the square with the exact same orientation and position, which is basically improbable but not impossible.
      Won't do any math about this, but I'll say les than 1%.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't specify that position and orientation are independent variables, or how they are distributed, so the question is ambiguous, even if they likely assume that it can be modeled via: the center of a given tile is dropped on a given tile (without loss of generality) with real x and y values selected from a uniform [0,1) distribution and the orientation is against selected from [0,PI/2)

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what does "cover any corner" even means.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It means the corner of the plane ends up on the inside of the dropped unit square.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Retard, you're asking me to compare two immeasurable numbers that cannot be defined in any way thanks to your vague direction
    You're comparing a distance of ~0 to a collection of infinitely small variations of angles

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Depends on the shape of the plane.
    Without this information, you're making assumptions. Without knowing the shape of the plane the answer is complete guesswork.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You felt really smart typing out this retardation

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Prove me wrong gay

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >game's source code is a complete fucking black box

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    mathfags talk about shit like this all day and expect to get payed
    LMAO

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      truly, the naked emperor of natural sciences
      no wonder I always hated it

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I know this one it's 1/pi for some fucking reason right and people run simulations of this to find digits of pi.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's with all the Ganker threads on Ganker lately?
    Taking refuge?
    YSBATST

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    2 - (6/pi)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *