EPT[GSL] Code A Ro32 Day 5 / Code S Ro32 Group F - Page 79
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
maximuspita
1093 Posts
| ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On January 07 2011 21:50 Jacobs Ladder wrote: Its all about limits. Think about the two functions f(x)=X and f(x)=x^2. Intuitively you know that x^2 gets bigger faster, so if you consider x^2 going to infinity and x going to infinity both of these eventually become infinity but X^2 is a bigger infinity. (going to infinity meaning X becoming closer and closer to infinity) That's my simplistic explanation from a engineering student thats awful at math. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_(mathematics) theres actually no such thing as a bigger infinity. f(x)=x^2 only approaches infinity faster than f(x)=x does. they will both only be infinitely approaching infinity, no such thing as a "bigger" infinity. only in 1st yr of college but in calc I | ||
|
Jacobs Ladder
United States1705 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:01 Aquafresh wrote: I don't think people are realizing the implications of that Ro16 graphic. It is entirely possible, probable even, that we have an IdrA vs Clide Ro16 matchup. I want to hear what Tastosis has to say about THAT. I love Idra, but I'm worried about him making it out of the group. If he loses against Jinro he'll be against Ensnare (who I expect to stomp Check). Ensnare may well two Rax SCV (he happily abused Reapers when they were the OP of the month) and if the maps work against him it might not be possible to defend. On January 07 2011 22:04 Silidons wrote: theres actually no such thing as a bigger infinity. f(x)=x^2 only approaches infinity faster than f(x)=x does. they will both only be infinitely approaching infinity, no such thing as a "bigger" infinity. only in 1st yr of college but in calc I You are of course correct, its just a way of talking about it to people who aren't familiar with it. Its how I think about it sometimes too (for instance, when using L'hopital's rule), even though its not accurate. Like I said, even though I've had 2 years of Calc, I'm still awful at math  . | ||
|
shannn
Netherlands2891 Posts
| ||
|
Asha
United Kingdom38256 Posts
On January 07 2011 21:59 Kamais_Ookin wrote: Good games today compared to past few days, code A still needs a big improvement though. I'm happy Nada and MC are advancing and the bad players (san) are getting fleshed out. Observing has also improved a ton and I feel like he's getting pretty comfortable at it now. We're kind of weeding out Code A a bit too, there's obviously a number of decent players in it but also a number who aren't really up to standard (like code s). Once things roll around a couple of promotion/relegation cycles and stabilize I think it'll all look a lot more impressive. | ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:05 Jacobs Ladder wrote: I love Idra, but I'm worried about him making it out of the group. If he loses against Jinro he'll be against Ensnare (who I expect to stomp Check). Ensnare may well two Rax SCV (he happily abused Reapers when they were the OP of the month) and if the maps work against him it might not be possible to defend. You are of course correct, its just a way of talking about it to people who aren't familiar with it. Its how I think about it sometimes too (for instance, when using L'hopital's rule), even though its not accurate. IdrA is never lucky with maps. He gets Jungle against Jinro, and knowing his luck, will get close metalop or close LT or delta quad vs his next opponent. | ||
|
42bsk
29 Posts
| ||
|
mpupu
Argentina183 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:04 Silidons wrote: theres actually no such thing as a bigger infinity. f(x)=x^2 only approaches infinity faster than f(x)=x does. they will both only be infinitely approaching infinity, no such thing as a "bigger" infinity. only in 1st yr of college but in calc I The most commonly known infinity is that of the natural numbers: 1, 2, 3, ... The concept can be formalized by the notion of cardinal numbers. Also, a relation of order can be established where a cardinal is less or equal than another if and only if there is an injection from a set with the former to a set with the latter. This is why people say that some infinities are greater than others, since for example there is an injection from N to R, but not from R to N (R is the real numbers, N is the natural numbers) Under this definition and contradicting what someone said previously, the line and the plane are the same infinity. (Just replied to this as I was too busy watching the awesome Kal vs Modesty games) | ||
|
shannn
Netherlands2891 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:01 Aquafresh wrote: I don't think people are realizing the implications of that Ro16 graphic. It is entirely possible, probable even, that we have an IdrA vs Clide Ro16 matchup. I want to hear what Tastosis has to say about THAT. The groups for Groupstage 2 next week Group A IMNesTea SlayerSBoxeR oGsZenio TSL_Trickster Group B IMMVP ChoyafOu theBestfOu oGsHyperDub Group C NsPGenius Winner Group G oGsNaDa Runner up Group H Group D oGsMC Winner Group H ST_RainbOw Runner up Group G Doesn't matter what place IdrA or Jinro hopefully advances. Either way they are going to get matched up vs heavy competetitors for the championship. Clide / MarineKing probably going to end up like that. In any case it's going to look like either vs Clide or MarineKing for anyone from group H. Both are tough and the groups are really stacked (except for B). | ||
|
Vorenius
Denmark1979 Posts
On January 07 2011 21:45 Imhotep wrote: Initial games: G1: #1 in points vs #3 in points. G2: #2 in points vs #4 in points. G3: winner of G1 vs loser of G2. G4: winner of G2 vs loser of G1. After that the following three scenarios can happen: 1. Two players at 2-0 (both will advance), and two at 0-2 (does not advance). The two players at 2-0 will play to determine 1st and 2nd spot. The two at 0-2 will play to determine 3rd and 4th. 2. One player at 2-0 (will advance as 1st). One at 0-2 (will not advance, 4th) Two players at 1-1. These will play to determine 2nd and 3rd. The winner advances. [This is what happened today] 3. All 4 players at 1-1. The players that hasn't faced off will play. The two with 2-1 will advance, with the player that won over the other goes as 1st. The two with 1-2 will not advance, with the one who won over the other goes as 3rd place. Don't ask me why it's this way, ask Gom :p The system isn't perfect but it's probably the only way to do it in max 6 matches. A normal round robin could end up in endless tiebreaker matches between three players. | ||
|
Taf the Ghost
United States11751 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:04 Silidons wrote: theres actually no such thing as a bigger infinity. f(x)=x^2 only approaches infinity faster than f(x)=x does. they will both only be infinitely approaching infinity, no such thing as a "bigger" infinity. only in 1st yr of college but in calc I The guy you quoted is wrong, but doesn't mean you're correct. f(x) = x & f(x) = x^(2) can be mapped to each other, so they're the equally "sized" of infinity (we'll ignore that there's conception of "size" with what we're talking about, but that'll pickle your brain if you spend too much time thinking about it). But f(x) = x is a "countable" infinity ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_infinity) while you can map all of the numbers between 0 and 1 to the "uncountable" infinity ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncountable_infinity ). This is more logic theory than all that advanced of mathematics, but, really, it will pickle your brain. That isn't a joke, as the stuff doesn't make any concrete "sense" in the physical world and are mathematical constructs (though important in Set theory). So don't get too hung on up on it. | ||
|
KristianJS
2107 Posts
| ||
|
Scoop
Finland482 Posts
| ||
|
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:07 Asha` wrote: I agree with you, things are only going to get better as time goes on which is great.We're kind of weeding out Code A a bit too, there's obviously a number of decent players in it but also a number who aren't really up to standard (like code s). Once things roll around a couple of promotion/relegation cycles and stabilize I think it'll all look a lot more impressive. | ||
|
timmyfred
United States302 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:12 KristianJS wrote: There ARE differing sizes of infinites guys. There are more real numbers than natural number for instance, in a well defined sense, even if they're both infinite. Differing densities and growth rates of infinite functions when comparing it to other functions, yes, but there is no concept greater than infinity. | ||
|
mpupu
Argentina183 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:26 timmyfred wrote: Differing densities and growth rates of infinite functions when comparing it to other functions, yes, but there is no concept greater than infinity. There is no such thing as an "infinite function". What exists is the definition of limit but the notion of a function that "tends to infinity" is a bit misleading as it is more related to unboundedness than infiniteness. The concept of infinity comes from set theory. | ||
|
koppik
United States676 Posts
| ||
|
timmyfred
United States302 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:30 mpupu wrote: There is no such thing as an "infinite function". What exists is the definition of limit but the notion of a function that "tends to infinity" is a bit misleading as it is more related to unboundedness than infiniteness. The concept of infinity comes from set theory. That's the wonderful thing about math, though...you can invent your own notation and terms and it be legitimate  By infinite function I was fairly clearly saying "unbounded functions, or, functions that tend to infinity as x goes to infinity". I never said that one couldn't compare different functions that go to infinity or that one infinite set couldn't be greater than another infinite set, but rather that there is no "number greater than infinity". Edit: or maybe my term usage wasn't all that clear, and it's incredibly early in the morning and I haven't had my coffee yet...regardless, this is the LR thread, and probably not the place for maths discussion | ||
|
Pyrthas
United States3196 Posts
On topic: Fuck yeah, July and Nada and MC! | ||
|
Imhotep
Sweden267 Posts
On January 07 2011 22:32 koppik wrote: I don't like the fact that the tournament had a rematch for InCa and NaDa. I don't feel like winning that rematch with SanZenith really should put InCa back to even with NaDa. Say InCa won in the rematch, then NaDa and InCa are 1-1 against each other, but InCa advances never having had to play MC. Well, it's Inca's reward for having more points than NaDa and sanZenith (from the previous GSL's). It promotes winning: the more you win -> the more points you have -> the more "lesser" players will you face. | ||
| ||
