Have I got this right when using the less than/more than arrows? I cannot seem to find a definitive answer as to which side of the number the symbol goes or which way. So:-
Less than say 6 is shown as <6
More than say 8 is shown as 8>
And if it is more than 6 but less than 8 it is shown as 6<x<8 or should that be 6>x<8.
Very confusing (for me!) as to which way the symbol goes and to which side of the number.
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 23rd April 2015, 10:59 AM BSTHave I got this right when using the less than/more than arrows? I cannot seem to find a definitive answer as to which side of the number the symbol goes or which way. So:-
Less than say 6 is shown as <6
More than say 8 is shown as 8>
And if it is more than 6 but less than 8 it is shown as 6<x<8 or should that be 6>x<8.
Very confusing (for me!) as to which way the symbol goes and to which side of the number.
B grade at O'Level. Nothing else. But surely you have the "more than" the wrong way around. The smaller amount has a point and the big one is where the legs are astride. So "more than say 8" is shown as 8<. Then just follow the chevrons as you take your tractor completely round the bend.
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 11:04 AM BSTB grade at O'Level. Nothing else. But surely you have the "more than" the wrong way around. The smaller amount has a point and the big one is where the legs are astride. So "more than say 8" is shown as 8<. Then just follow the chevrons as you take your tractor completely round the bend.
Thanks Horse, but two things -does it matter which side the chevron goes on and which of the "more than but less than" is correct?
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 23rd April 2015, 11:13 AM BSTThanks Horse, but two things -does it matter which side the chevron goes on and which of the "more than but less than" is correct?
Erm, I think you would find it less confusing if you dropped the reference to just one number so that you have two or three numbers instead. Let's do three numbers. 6, 7 and 8. I'd say refer mainly to the middle number when discussing their relationships with each other.
So............ 6 is less than 7 but 8 is more than 7, ie 6<7<8.
Alternatively, if you do just want to use one number and one symbol as in 6 is "more than" something unspecified, I think you need to turn the wording in your thoughts around a little bit.
So rather than saying "less than 6 is" and "more than 8 is" you should be saying "6 is less than" and "8 is more than". In language terms, that would be about what is the subject and what is the object.
In both cases, that way of thinking places the symbol on the right hand side.
So..........6 is less than something would be 6< and 8 is more than something would be 8>.
The symbol would only need to go on the left hand side if there are more numbers as indicated above.
But even then whether it is on the left hand side can be arguable because if you look at the 6<7 part of 6<7<8, the symbol could be interpreted both as on the right of a figure and the left of a figure. < is left of 7 but it right of 6. So it depends what figure you are thinking of.
I'm not certain. I hope/think this is correct. If so, does it help?
Yes it does. Before.
Here's a mathematical conundrum you might find taxing 2+2=
Here's an easier one, I have to build a new house to fill a 10m2 plot but the client doesn't like squares and it has to be as big inside as possible. What shape do I have to make it to satisfy that criteria?
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 23rd April 2015, 11:44 AM BSTYes it does. Before.
Here's a mathematical conundrum you might find taxing 2+2=
HGT should know that one. I haven't got a clue. From memory I used to get A- for arithmetic and C+ for advanced maths. I was on an intellectual mountain top at 11 and adjusted by coming 120th out of 120 at 12. Weird but true. Ever since the emphasis has been on trying to maintain some equilibrium.
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 11:20 AM BSTErm, I think you would find it less confusing if you dropped the reference to just one number so that you have two or three numbers instead. Let's do three numbers. 6, 7 and 8. I'd say refer mainly to the middle number when discussing their relationships with each other.
So............ 6 is less than 7 but 8 is more than 7, ie 6<7<8.
Alternatively, if you do just want to use one number and one symbol as in 6 is "more than" something unspecified, I think you need to turn the wording in your thoughts around a little bit.
So rather than saying "less than 6 is" and "more than 8 is" you should be saying "6 is less than" and "8 is more than". In language terms, that would be about what is the subject and what is the object.
In both cases, that way of thinking places the symbol on the right hand side.
So..........6 is less than something would be 6< and 8 is more than something would be 8>.
The symbol would only need to go on the left hand side if there are more numbers as indicated above.
But even then whether it is on the left hand side can be arguable because if you look at the 6<7 part of 6<7<8, the symbol could be interpreted both as on the right of a figure and the left of a figure. < is left of 7 but it right of 6. So it depends what figure you are thinking of.
I'm not certain. I hope/think this is correct. If so, does it help?
Er maybe, until Alfred says the chevron needs to go before.
You see, logically (in my mind 
) Less than 6 would be <6 and more than 6 would be 6<, but if the chevron must go before, then more than 6 would be <6 but that doesn't make sense as that indicates less than. God I'm confused!
Also, the "formula" for a number in between as stated previous (6<x<8) was given to me by a Maths teacher, BUT he was suffering from MS at the time and his memory is fading so this is the reason for me looking at this all over again as what he gave me didn't seem to make sense either.
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 23rd April 2015, 12:04 PM BSTEr maybe, until Alfred says the chevron needs to go before.
You see, logically (in my mind
Also, the "formula" for a number in between as stated previous (6<x<8) was given to me by a Maths teacher, BUT he was suffering from MS at the time and his memory is fading so this is the reason for me looking at this all over again as what he gave me didn't seem to make sense either.
Yes, but you are still saying less than 6 and more than 6 rather than 6 is less than and 6 is more than. I am wondering if the More Than company is a problem here.
Anyhow, if x is 7 your maths teacher was correct. 6 is less than 7 and 7 is less than 8 or if you want to put it in a different way on that second point 8 is more than 7.
I'm not sure you should be bothered by the positioning. It is a red herring. 8>4. So, yes, 4 is a smaller figure than 8 but I'm putting 4 after the figure 8 for the hell of it.
That is why the symbol is useful. You can stick the numbers in any order you like.
And what that means is you have the flexibility to use the symbol however it suits.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 23rd April 2015, 11:44 AM BSTYes it does. Before.
Here's a mathematical conundrum you might find taxing 2+2=
5 x 2 rectangle? Is it that simple..........probably not. >_<
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 12:08 PM BSTYes, but you are still saying less than 6 and more than 6 rather than 6 is less than and 6 is more than. I am wondering if the More Than company is a problem here. Anyhow, if x is 7 your maths teacher was correct.
But you are assuming it is a figure that is relatively less than/more than 6. What if the question is what figure is less than or more than 6? Where would the chevron go then?
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 12:08 PM BSTYes, but you are still saying less than 6 and more than 6 rather than 6 is less than and 6 is more than. I am wondering if the More Than company is a problem here.
Anyhow, if x is 7 your maths teacher was correct. 6 is less than 7 and 7 is less than 8 or if you want to put it in a different way on that second point 8 is more than 7.
I'm not sure you should be bothered by the positioning. It is a red herring. 8>4. So, yes, 4 is a smaller figure than 8 but I'm putting 4 after the figure 8 for the hell of it.
That is why the symbol is useful. You can stick the numbers in any order you like.
And what that means is you have the flexibility to use the symbol however it suits.
Ah! I think the penny is dropping..............let me digest that quietly.
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 23rd April 2015, 12:14 PM BST5 x 2 rectangle? Is it that simple..........probably not. >_<
But you are assuming it is a figure that is relatively less than/more than 6. What if the question is what figure is less than or more than 6? Where would the chevron go then?
I have added to my post. What figure is less than 6? You could have either <6? or 6>? as that question for it isn't the positioning that matters. It is the direction of the chevron. But I would say that the first is neater if it would make VCM happier. And I will have the Eye of Horus next please.
It goes before in both cases. So, 'less than 6' is '<6' and 'more than 6' is '>6'. Think of it in terms of saying 'the thing is' before either of them (which you probably are doing) so that bit of the equation is already there in your text (most likely).
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 23rd April 2015, 11:44 AM BSTYes it does. Before.
Here's a mathematical conundrum you might find taxing 2+2=
Assuming he likes rectangles then you take an infinitely small slice from one length so technically it's not a square anymore 
And assuming a square with rounded edges is also unacceptable, I imagine it's a circle diameter the length of one side.
Dan
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 12:18 PM BSTI have added to my post. What figure is less than 6? You could have either <6? or 6>? as that question for it isn't the positioning that matters. It is the direction of the chevron. But I would say that the first is neater if it would make VCM happier. And I will have the Eye of Horus next please.
Well deduced Horse! But that is not the question - it is part of a more complicated one...............
Quote: swerytd @ 23rd April 2015, 1:07 PM BSTIt goes before in both cases. So, 'less than 6' is '<6' and 'more than 6' is '>6'. Think of it in terms of saying 'the thing is' before either of them (which you probably are doing) so that bit of the equation is already there in your text (most likely).
Assuming he likes rectangles then you take an infinitely small slice from one length so technically it's not a square anymore
And assuming a square with rounded edges is also unacceptable, I imagine it's a circle diameter the length of one side.
Dan
Ummm, so my Maths teacher friend has it wrong ( 6<x<8 ) when you are looking for a number between two other numbers? Or would he be correct because to put it as <6x<8 would not make sense?
Quote: swerytd @ 23rd April 2015, 1:07 PM BSTIt goes before in both cases. So, 'less than 6' is '<6' and 'more than 6' is '>6'. Think of it in terms of saying 'the thing is' before either of them (which you probably are doing) so that bit of the equation is already there in your text (most likely).
That does look right, yes, and it is neat. To have it as 6< would be "what is 6 less than?" which means the same thing as "what is more than 6?" but 6< probably looks better in a construction.
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 23rd April 2015, 1:16 PM BST
Ummm, so my Maths teacher friend has it wrong ( 6<x<8 ) when you are looking for a number between two other numbers? Or would he be correct because to put it as <6x<8 would not make sense?
In the first case there, 6 is less than x so x is definitely 7. In the second, so far as it makes sense, any number that goes before <6 must be less than 6. So the main point surely is how you define and indeed describe "less than" symbolically depends on what "less than" is being used in relation to.
I think you have a concept here that if you stick an x or a number against 6> or 6<, it then relates to something - which is correct : it relates to whatever it is stuck against, eg 6<x, 6<7 - but that if you don't do that at that start and just say "less than 6", ie >6, it doesn't relate to anything much at all.
It's standing alone in that thinking. In mid air. As if it is some sort of entity of itself.
But it does relate to something. In actuality, it relates to all the numbers lower than 6.
The reason why you are not grasping that fully is that without the x or a number preceding it - and being in the form of a question which someone else has to answer - it appears to you that what it relates to at the start is so invisible that the phrase "less than six" or >6 is absent of full context.
Look at this way.
I say "bat and ball" or "ball and bat"? What is the better phrase? You say it's "bat and ball". Fine. So then I say but is it "bat and?" or "ball and?"? You reply it depends on the context. If the answer is "ball", it's "bat and?" If it's "chain", it's "ball and". And I say "oh no, I'm asking how the question must be asked. It's "bat and?" or "ball and?". There is a definitive way". No, sorry pal, but there just isn't.
Quote: A Horseradish @ 23rd April 2015, 1:28 PM BSTI say "bat and ball" or "ball and bat"? What is the better phrase? You say it's "bat and ball". Fine. So then I say but is it "bat and?" or "ball and?"? You reply it depends on the context. If the answer is "ball", it's "bat and?" If it's "chain", it's "ball and". And I say "oh no, I'm asking how the question must be asked. It's "bat and?" or "ball and?"". There is a definitive way. No, sorry pal, but there just isn't.
Sorry, go on!
Quote: Gordon Bennett @ 23rd April 2015, 2:51 PM BSTSorry, go on!
I have been a rover
I have walked alone
Hiked a hundred highways
Never found a home
Still in all I'm happy
The reason is, you see
Once in a while along the way
Love's been good to me
There was a girl in Denver
Before the summer storm
Oh, her eyes were tender
Oh, her arms were warm
And she could smile away the thunder
Kiss away the rain
Even though she's gone away
You won't hear me complain
I have been a rover
I have walked alone
Hiked a hundred highways
Never found a home
Still in all I'm happy
The reason is, you see
Once in a while along the way
Love's been good to me