YOUR ARGUMENT
It is invalid.
Submitted by: Unknown
Picture by: shesmah
-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous LATVIA LISTENING SKILLS | OVERCOMPENSATING Next »
YOUR ARGUMENT
» See all 191 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
cloud Windfoot Omega on FALSE cloud Windfoot Omega on THUG LIFE Lolligator on SEASIDE HOUSE jebus2477 on SEEMS LEGIT geoingo on MANGA jebus2477 on STRAPON FRIDAY kurmon on THAT AWKWARD MOMENT Mr. Torgo on PLEASE! Mr. Torgo on PLEASE! UniqueIndividualHips… on ALSO STRAIGHT WOMEN
More MEMEBASE
Memebase - All Your Memes Are In Our Base
Mustache Gum
This Is Photobomb - Surprise! Ruined Photos
Sunday Bunday: A Butt of Wind
GraphJam - Music & Culture for People Who Love Charts
Looks Good to Me
Señor Gif - Funny Animated GIFs
Dad's Rocket Test
Picture Is Unrelated - Funny WTF Pictures
Couldn't We Just Have Gotten a Dog?
Comixed - Vertical 4 Pane Comics
Frodo Would've Been Lucky to Get Out of the Shire That Way
Derp - All the Derp Durr Hurr that's fit to Derp
Nurrrr Thank Yurrrr
Art of Trolling - Trolls on Chatroulette and Yahoo! Answers
The Trick Is to Use Them Oppositely
Go Cry Emo Kid - Go Cry Emo Kids
That's Going to Leave a Stain
Superheroes - Superheroes
Yep
Rage Comics - Express Your Rage
They'd be Very Proud
Pokémemes - I choose you!
Bite Hard and Don't Bother With a Stick
Heh. Asymptotes!
it means tan (90) welcome to radians idiot. this is a completely valid math statement.
Haha nice one
fail poster is fail
it is invalid.. tan (90) does not exist..
it is an error: division by zero. the asymptote has jump discontinuity but it does not make the number not exist. we use numbers that dont exist all the time( i.e. imaginary, and extraneous solutions)
tan(pi/2) doesn’t exist, it is undefined. The tangens is a function which is only defined on the open interval (-pi/2;pi/2).
Also, even tho we work with numbers that don’t exist all the time, dividing by zero still isn’t possible. No, even x/0 = infinity still causes contradictions.
The tangent function is actually defined on all real numbers except odd multiples of pi/2. You’re thinking of the inverse tangent function that is only defined on (-pi/2,pi/2)
can you translate that to arabic?
pi/2 is the same thing as 90 degrees. The tangent function is defined everywhere except at pi/2 plus an integer multiple of pi, which is the same as saying that it is defined everywhere except at 90 degrees plus integer multiples of 180 degrees.
ويعرف في الواقع وظيفة الظل على جميع الارقام الحقيقية باستثناء المضاعفات ونيف من بي / 2. كنت تفكر في وظيفة معكوس الظل التي تم تعريفها فقط على (بي – / 2، بي / 2)
You, sir, have just won 1 free internets.
Congraduration.
He used Google translate. Ergo, no internetz for him. I shall keep them for myself. NOM NOM NOM!
ALSO: translation sucks, he’s saying: and known in reality function the shadow on all real numbers except wanif from pi/2. you were thinking in function of opposite shadow that was defined only on pi-/2, pi/2.
WTF?!?!
i lol’d
Doesn’t tan(pi/2) = >9000? Hence the troll?
ummm i hav a scientific calculator in my hand and i am typing in tan(pi/2) and guess what!!! it is coming out to be 0.0274224385. seems pretty valid to me. ps Pao126. pi/2 is 1.570796327. not 90. and rudiculous. they r dividing by 2…not 0. go back to kindergarden. This is a totally valid argument.
ps i know what i am talking about. just finished doing this in honors geometry.
ok i would lk to make somthing clear. i was doing this in degrees. STILL A FAIL CUZ U SHOULD HAVE SAID IT WAS IN RADIAN!!!! totally works for degrees but not radian. therefore i only half apologize
Real mathematicians use radians. You know, because of Euler´s identity and stuff.
So, please, STFU or GTFO.
fully apologize now. only an idiot would think that pi/2 is in degrees and not radians *facepalm* x9001
you fail. you should apologise fully for your incompetence.
Your incompetence is over 9000!
Radians is assumed, as it is MUCH more commonly used than degrees when doing trig.
PS. I know what I’m talking about. I have an A in AP Calculus.
Some day you might make it to big-boy maths.
I THINK THIS IS SHOPPED BECAUSE OF THE HAVING HONORS GEOMETRY AND ALSO FROM HAVING SEEN QUITE A FEW SCIENTIFIC CALCULATORS IN MY DAY
Just being simple, but you could leave tan alone and divide pi by 2.
tan x 1.57
Suck it, geometry.
The result if still the same. tan(pi/2) and tan(90) don’t exist.
Darn, two others beat me to it.
Yeah? Well since some guy can just invent the square root of negative numbers, I can just invent the reciprocal of 0. It is now called “€”
Finally! Thank you! ^-^
Sorry that the rest of the world uses degrees idiot.
Actually the rest of the world does use radians as well as degrees. Its a pretty universal argument when working with trig functions.
everybody who has had an even slightly advanced math class has used radians. it’s used universally in math
Yes, because the rest of the world has never taken Trigonometry or Calculus. Those of us who have find radians far more useful.
well i am sorry that my math teacher taught us in degrees. no idea why but we hav to listen to our teacher so shut up about us never taking trig or calc
Leave Evilred alone guys, advanced calc isn’t generally taught to people whose age is in the single digits.
Wow, then is he pretty smart for someone still in elementary school. Being that he says he is in honors geometry.
BURN
This is all very clearly explained in a diagram at the new Math made easy site. Just search for “LemonParty” in Google Images….
haha, ppl are retards!
Some people don’t know basic algebra..
tan(pi / 2) = 1.63317787 × 10^16
Irrational, perhaps, but hardly invalid.
do not just trust your calculator…
Your math is wrong. tan(pi/2) doesn’t exist.
Now, tan (1.570796326794896619231321691639751442098584699687552910487) does (although it equals 2.11732… × 10^57)
Note: pi/2 ~ 1.570796326794896619231321691639751442098584699687552910487
so uve just discovered the limit
nice one
this is not the limit.
the limit is at infinity..
No, Google’s math is wrong.
http://www.google.com/search?q=tan(pi+%2F+2)
If pi/2 is only “tilde” that number, then the result of the function is only “tilde” as well, not “equals”. You fail.
your calculator is probably on degrees this is using radians
okay then, go ahead, try drawing a triangle with 2 90 degree angles, i’ll wait…
in a flat plane, ofc
Dang. I was going to do it on a globe and use three. Spoilsport!
this. Any other argument has now been invalidated.
And he even used laymans terms.
you are doing it in degrees, a different unit than radians, pi/2rad=90deg, radian values are derived from the unit circle. its like using meters rather than yards, and in case you’re interested the conversion rate is 1rad=180/pi degrees
When you see a problem like this (i.e. a trigonometric problem with pi in the function) you use radians. You will then get an asymptote, which is an invalid number, hence the poster.
yeah this is very valid. i have been doing vectors and trig in my tech math class.
ITS NOT VALID, LEARN TRIG PROPERLY; THIS IS IN RADIANS
People…tan(pi/2) or tan(90º) is 1 / 0. Learn 2 unit circle.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! You divided by ZERO!!!
OMG!!!!!!!!!!
OH SHI-
no matter what the result is, the argument (pi/2) is valid
tan(pi/0) is a much better invalid argument
tan(pi/2) is a statement pi/2 is the argument. the argument is perfectly valid even if the result of the statement is undefined
I beg to differ.
pi/2 by itself is a number, not an argument. An argument can be called an argument because it is used by a function.
So ‘argument’ refers to Pi/2 used by function tan, not Pi/2 by itself.
It’s not a fail to say that Pi/2 is an invalid argument for function tan.
This is a win and I lolled, yes sir.
“This is a win and I lolled, yes sir.”
same here XD
but still.. hes right and just solved all discussion here
Seconded
OMFG, i have to explain this AGAIN. the unit he is using is radians, not degrees, radians are much much easier to use in almost all areas of trig once you learn what they are. 1rad=180/pi degrees. so pi/2rad=90deg. try doing tan(90) on your calculator, see what happens or switch to radians and do tan(pi/2). k?
Getting the joke fail.
Poster should have mentioned to input this in Radians, not Degrees.
in radians ‘invalid input’
in degrees 0.0274224384820977685832879918….
and for the hell of it
in grads 0.0246790194577827743286337574….
pi/2 doesn’t need to be defined as radians, it should be perfectly clear from the statement
Wolfram Alpha give the same result (complex infinity) for both tan(pi/2) and tan(90).
every time i hear the name Wolfram Alpha, i can’t help but think of the evil lawyers from buffy-minus-buffy
I’m glad somebody uses Wolfram Alpha
Holy crap, I didn’t know Stephen Wolfram was a Memebase fan!
Is pi/2 not enough clue that it supposed to be in rad?
If you see a measurement in fractions of pi, it’s a safe assumption that you’re dealing with radians.
radians are unitless
Seriously, who uses grads?
*radians. everyone who has gone farther into trig than learning socahtoa actually. they’re almost always easier to use. k?
*grads. Stop trying to lecture something you clearly don’t understand. Here, I’ll help you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grad_(angle)
do you seriously think you’re ever gonna practically find an angle of pi/2 degrees? no. that’s why it is totally obvious that this is in radians, if u see pi, think radians. k?
tan(pi/2) is a statement pi/2 is the argument. the argument is perfectly valid even if the result of the statement is undefined
Usually these “invalid” ones are only good because of an absurd picture. This one just shows a mathematical phenomenon. “Wow”. (Also there’s no = so it is valid :/)
Whoooosh.
(Hint: argument is a mathematical term.)
guys, seriously, use your brain and your mathematical knowledge instead of stupid calculators. calculators do not give you real results, just approximation…
when you see 10^67 or more it means it’s an approximation of infinity…
That’s not even a googol, so it’s nowhere near infinity.
*facepalm* x9001 as long as you know how to use a calculator, it won’t be wrong, ever, except for extraneous solutions, with which this has nothing to do. the reason you get an actual value for tan(pi/2) is because you are using degrees, so you are find the ratio of the opposite to the adjacent of an angle in a right angle triangle. which is very possible. however this problem is in radians, not degrees, a different unit for measuring angles derived from the unit circle. and this should be glaringly obvious since practically, you would never find yourself with an angle of pi/2 degrees. converted to degrees, this is tan(90) which is invalid because of a division by 0 (opposite/adjacent=opposite/0). class dismissed
Once again, stop digging. Read what he said. Note the 10^67. Now, take out your calculator, do tan(pi/2) in degrees, and see if the answer is anywhere near 10^67.
How does this have more negatives than positives??!!!!
This was hilarious! One of the best ones I’ve seen in weeks.
I agree! What the hell?
This is the kind of thing that appeals to math geeks. And math geeks will know that the “argument” in that statement is pi/2, and pi/2 is perfectly valid.
Tangent of pi/2 is “undefined,” so saying it is “invalid” is not actually correct.
To answer your question, “How does this have more negatives than positives??!!!!” you must realize this: When you make a joke that only appeals to math geeks, you need to be absolutely unquestionably correct. This is NOT absolutely unquestionably correct. It is a FAIL. That is why it has more negatives than positives.
FAIL!
No, I think this has more negatives than positives because most visitors to this website are ignorant and don’t understand the joke.
Well.. No matter what, its his argument that is invalid, not our…
the argument is pi/2
tan is the function
so, the argument is valid, but not the statement
Nice one!
Pi/2 isn’t a valid argument for tan though… On its own, Pi/2 is of course valid, that’s obvious.
If you do some programming, you should know that if you use a String type as an argument of a function expecting a Integer type, the compiler will tell you “invalid argument in function xxx…”
That doesn’t make a String type invalid or non-existent, but it is invalid as an argument (i.e. used by a given function).
Same here : Pi/2, though a perfectly valid number, is an invalid argument for function tan.
IHBT, A+++ 10/10, I raged more than once.
These comments hurt my brain!
this is bloody brilliant. all the dislikes are people who doesn’t know enough maths.
And yet the world continues to spin about its axis.
Yeah, but seriously, i did advanced and general math (to score high) and even in general they taught this. Although i guess most viewers are American, and we all know how great their education system is.
Math is universal: invalid, no válido, ungültig, invalide. Makes no difference to me.
No válido is not valid. It would be inválido.
I’m American and can probably run (and draw har) circles around you in the field of math. Thanks for playing, though.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
AMARCANS IS SO STUPID LOLLOL
you doesn’t know enough englishes
WIN
what argument? and it is NOT invalid, it is non-existent…kinda like the wit of these comments…
omfg *facepalm* don’t even try dude, its an invalid argument. invalid argument is actually a math term, it doesn’t come from all these memes depicting epicness and saying “MY HAIR IS BIRD, your argument is invalid”, a word you could substitute for that is undefined, because it implies a division by 0.
SO MUCH MATH!!!!!!
Good job proving the stereotype of Internet nerds, folks.
In Sowjet Russia Pi/2 is invalid for cot!
My argument is 0.027422438????
I don’t get it…
You sir,
FAIL.
its not using the degrees unit for an angle, its using radians. pi/2rad=90deg. try putting tan(90) in your calculator, its the same thing
Literally LOL. Beautiful.
If it’s not Indiana Jones punching out Lord Voldemort while riding a T-Rex using rocket skates that breathes fire and has gatling cannons for arms, I don’t want to know.
Challenge accepted!
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=tan(pi/2)
1/0 will also give the same answer, complex infinity, and yes, I DIVIDED BY ZERO!!!!!!!
Random math facts make arguments invalid nowadays?
omfg *facepalm* don’t even try dude, its an invalid argument. invalid argument is actually a math term, it doesn’t come from all these memes depicting epicness and saying “MY HAIR IS BIRD, your argument is invalid”, a word you could substitute for that is undefined, because it implies a division by 0.
Indeed. The context of the argument could have been a mere example. The argument, while in this instance is invalid, it is only because of the function into which it was inserted. I would say it’s both the function and the operators are incorrect, considering the context in which they are in the picture above.
I have a boner.
tan(pi/2) -> infinity
i dont get it
So i don’t have any knowledge about trigonometrics in english. But by knowing a few facts: pi/2=90° (pi=180), tangens = sinus/cosinus. sin90°=1 while cos90°=0. So 1/0 is invalid, because you can’t divide by zero.
The expression tan(pi/2) does not evaluate as infinite but as the reciprocal of the floating point accuracy eps since pi is only a floating-point approximation to the exact value of . (http://www.mathworks.com/help/techdoc/ref/tan.html)
tan(pi[rad]/2)=infinity
tan(pi/2)= 0,027422438482097768583287991871187
so that we definitely solve this argument…
the picture is tan(pi/[rad]2) not tan(pi[rad]/2
Don’t let the fail hit you on the way out
2.742243848210e-02
Why are you guys saying Pi/2 is the argument so it’s valid. An argument is only a real number. And tan pi/2 is not a real number. So it’s not a valid argument.
Why the hell would Pi/2 not be a real number ?
This is the length of quarter of circle, you can mesure it…
I know that. I nevers said pi/2 wasn’t real. Read plz.
And everyone’s saying tan pi/2 is equal to infinity, which is very wrong too. Even if you talk about the limit, it can be seen as -inifinity
Sorry I misread you indeed.
But I don’t think anyone said tan pi/2 equals infinity (or they were corrected immediatly). Mostly I read tan pi/2 is “undefined”.
So I think we agree, pi/2, though a real number, is an invalid argument.
A QUARTER OF A PIZZA MAKES A TRIANGLE THAT HAS TWO 90 DEGREE ANGLES. I’m just sayin’
ummmmmmmmmmmmm just one actually.
*facepalm* a triangle has 3 FLAT sides, a quarter of a circle has two flat sides and an arc. it also only has ONE 90deg angle. k?
If you draw a very huge triangle on the floor, you could make a triangle with three 90deg angles, because of the curve of the Earth
But of course this wouldn’t be a real triangle from a mathematical point of view.
You’ve never been with a woman, have you?
Three. Of course it’s not really a triangle.
I bet Chuck Norris would solve this
Hahaha that’s freakin awesome!
Too bad some people dont understand it.
For those people:
GO LEARN MATH!
you all wrong.
its 1.
im god, trust me.
Yay! I get this! I feel smart. n_n
tan(pi/2)=sin(pi/2)/cos(pi/2)=1/0 and it’s invalid, you can’t divide by zero
Oh yeah? Watch thi
Man: Oh look, this isn’t an argument!
Other Man: Yes it is!
Man: No it isn’t!
Man: It’s just contradiction!
Other Man: Nonsense!
Man:(exasperated) Oh, this is futile!!
Other Man: No it isn’t!
Man: An argument isn’t just contradiction.
Other Man: Well! it CAN be!
Man: No it can’t!
Man: An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
Other Man:…
…
…
…No it isn’t!
There – I have just rendered your argument invalid and silly.
Let the trooololollling begin anew!
(And yes I paraphrased the sketch a bit. umad?)
You, my good sir, definitely come close to winning. If only you hadn’t paraphrased.
Shouldn’t it be your argument is undefined?
same thing. but you don’t say your argument is undefined, you just say its undefined.
haha great stuff reminds me of monty python too
more at
http://malestalk.com/
Okay, none of this Maths makes sense to me. I’m an 11 year old from New Zealand (Where we are currently experiencing Seismic difficulties). I’m in a Maths Extension group, but we haven’t learnt this. Is there something wrong with my country? Because I’ve never heard of this equation. If any Kiwi has, please reply. KTHXBAI!
its trig, and radians. if you haven’t learned that, no worries. i learned it when i was 15 in my honors functions class.
The argument is not invalid, the result of the tangent function is. Fail!
What makes you think Pi/2 is the argument, and not tan(Pi/2) ?
Knowledge of math terminology?
In mathematics an “argument” is the value operated on by a function. Don’t ask me why – it’s just one of those things made up to annoy people.
Pi/2 is an invalid argument for function tan.
“Invalid argument” is not the same as “Invalid number”. Of course Pi/2 by itself is a valid number, but it can’t be used as an argument of function tan.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=tan(pi/2)
so can i have my half a pie without the sun damage?
Congrats, you win on both lolling about the situation, and directing it as a misunderstanding of the meaning of rad not the use of Rad.
You get +1 Wit
I hate you, for making me laugh at this…
Lol, I did not get the joke until I remembered to switch to Rad
0,02742243848… my argument
your argument is not in radians, nice try.
I don’t get it.
I don’t get it.
^ VIRGINS ^
Math is great and all, but there’s no reason to start WW5 over a mistake…
TAN (pi/2) does exist. I’m holding it in my hand right now and it smells like flowers. Either that, or I need to put the cap back on my Sharpie.
proof of girlfriendless nerds on the internet
tan (pi/2)=0.027 ……
I laughed my ass off. It’s nice to see some intelligent humor on here once in a while.
Well, OK… once anyway.
Cheezburger.com
Now home to the mathematics debate club..
KK, my calculus teacher is a math doctorate, and this is how he explained it, kind of dummied down. Tan is Opposite over adjacent. TOA. At a 90 degree angle, both sides could potentially be opposite and adjacent! It therefore can not be designed.
He put it even more simply as:
Tan=Sin/cos. Sin90=1, cos90=0 you cannot divide by zero, so the answer is undefined. (This was in degrees)
In radians: Sin(pi/2)=1, cos(pi/2) =0.
I think I have cleared that up.
Also, he said that because it is undefined, it is invalid. The function as a whole can be referred to as an ‘argument’, but not commonly in his experience.
Therefore, this function can be referred to as an invalid argument.
note: designed should be “defined”
Thank you
Thats trig. completely valid, you have to graph the tangent of pi/2.
| <—- A Graph of the "Triangle" where the tanθ = (pi/2)
I hope I got this right… Please don't hurt me too bad… (-:
tan(x)=sin(x)/cos(x)
sin(Pi/2)=1 cos(Pi/2)=0
Tan(Pi/2)=1/0
Damn it. I just divided by zero.
makes perfect sense, 0,2742243848
Lack of precision in the poster to get it properly. I suppose he is talking about the trigonometrical function.
Trigonometrical functions are only set to work with values of angles in radians, and not degree.
Because I think in geometry you can get the tangent of a triangle where the studied angle is Pi/2 degrees, meaning approximatively 1,54… . And you will find something around 0,0027, etc. Which is normal.
However, in trigonometry, that’s different because you get radian values of angles into the function. There studying an angle of Pi/2 radians doesn’t have the same meaning. It means the angle is 90 degrees, and therefore, the function will send no result of this value. If you calculator is set into a degree mode, it is the same as entering “tan 90″, which will send you nothing. The function f(x)=tan (x) is not defined on Pi/2, as a lot of people already said, it involves dividing in zero which is impossible.
There is no stories of argument neither. The argument comes when you are studying the value of the angle made from the positive axis Ox, with the position vector OM, where the point M have as an “affix”, a complex number z = x + iy, belonging to the complex set C. arg is itself a function, just giving that angle from the algebraic formula of z. The angle is also called the argument of z. Since it is also set in radians, taking its value in the function tan, will also send no result if the value of the argument is Pi/2, for the same reasons.
So, no need to speak of arguments to make that statement about tangent.
Now, about the meme stuff, I don’t know if the creator known argument was a mathematic object or just wanted to talk about the joke. What is sure, is that said alone, “tan (Pi/2)” means nothing concrete we could base on to conclude anything. It can send a result or it can not according to what Pi/2 means. Also, “invalid” isn’t a proper mathematic vocabulary, and means nothing. So it is possible he didn’t know what argument meant for maths.
Not impossible I am wrong on some stuffs, trigonometry never was something I liked.
Have a nice day/night everyone
lots of uninitiated mortals. this is the price that you pay for sleeping in your math class!!! bwahahaha
Wow…….. Now I know where all the nerds on the internet congregate.
And you know, the poster wasn’t funny, but all of you arguing over the math was.
*facepalm*
Hey Haters,
Y U no recognize that (pi/2) is a radian? Y U think it is a degree?
The argument is indeed invalid considering the values of sin(pi/2) and cos(pi/2).
Still, if we consider the value of sin and cos at pi/2 radians on trigonometric circle you gain sin(sqrt(2)/2) / cos ( sqrt(2)/2) = 1 which in that case describe a 45 degree angle.
tan(pi / 2) = 1.63317787 × 10^16
0.027422438
I think everybody knows but…
RADIANS
(Pi Radian)/2 ~ (3.14… * 57.3…)/2 = 180/2 = 90
tan(90) doesn’t exist
DEGREES
Pi/2 = 1.57
tan(1.57) = 1255.76559
Some serious thought went into this list of statements, and proved that you can be intelligent and completely retarded at the same time. Who takes the time to argue about things like this? And why?
All of you “smart” people are completely wrong! And it’s disgusting to see how all of these people are agreeing with the glaringly obvious mistake in the picture.
“You’re argument” not “Your argument”
Can’t tell if trolling, or just really stupid…probably both.
Sense… this whole thing makes none…
hai guyz u should use an argand diagram next time ^_^
Oh no… Not even nerds are immune to this monster!!!