Fun stuff -- word related or not, ramblings, junk, whatever.

[bwt1213]

While playing the "what word did lalatan find this time," was surprised by the disparity in point values between diagonalizing and rediagonalizing.

Despite having worked in at least 3 fields where the word might have come into play, have never ever ever come across diagonalize in actual use. Odd that it's somehow in wide usage.


Screen Shot 2023-01-02 at 3.43.40 PM.png

Maybe Spike used the term casually with his fellow mathematicians over afternoon tea with a frequency that....

pps: has anyone here every used this term outside this game?

Yeah, I have. But then Spike and I have a (former) occupation in common. I also did a ferocious amount of computer programming, and the term came up there a lot of times, too. But the "re-" derivative term is one I don't remember having seen. Once you've diagonalized, why would you want to do it again on the same matrix?

[Naboka]

Yeah, I have. But then Spike and I have a (former) occupation in common. I also did a ferocious amount of computer programming, and the term came up there a lot of times, too. But the "re-" derivative term is one I don't remember having seen. Once you've diagonalized, why would you want to do it again on the same matrix?

Whoa! Did what I thought was a lot of math to get through the science stuff, but...!!!!

Looking up diagonalize for more than a guessed at/cursory understanding, and it's waaaaaay above my paygrade. Makes me feel like an idiot. Completely do not get the process. And probably have no use for it this late in life. Seems like trying to backflip over a fullgrown sequoia.

All of my math was from the early to mid 70's. Never heard it mentioned. Never was on any test we took.

And computers used punch cards or whatever they were called.

Do a fair amount of construction where triangularization comes into play. Same with artwork, where triangles help establish compositions and exact locations. Used to survey where we used triangles for various measurements. So, I assumed diagonalization had something to do with those concepts.

Ooops!

Computers and programming stultify me.

So...

Yikes!

Probably why I like spending time alone: so I can technically be the smartest person in the room.

[Spike1007]

I've never rediagonalized anything, or even remember seeing or hearing it. I've been waiting for years to see REORTHONORMALIZATION though. bwt, you could make the same comment for that. If you do it once, why do it again? In my case, it was part of a larger iterative process, where I'd do something else to the matrix in between orthonormalization steps, hence the RE-.

[bwt1213]

I've never rediagonalized anything, or even remember seeing or hearing it. I've been waiting for years to see REORTHONORMALIZATION though. bwt, you could make the same comment for that. If you do it once, why do it again? In my case, it was part of a larger iterative process, where I'd do something else to the matrix in between orthonormalization steps, hence the RE-.

That's interesting. I always did diagonalization as a part of matrix inversion. I created a way of generating a set of orthogonal vectors from any given non-null vector when I took my first linear algebra class, and picky little stuff like that always fascinated me. I always felt guilty that it did. It's like being the guy who created long division or the thing that looks like long division for doing square roots. In my own mind, I will always be famous for independently discovering LaGrange interpolation, two centuries late. It's more of that fiddly kind of stuff. Perhaps it's why I like this game so much. Note for non-mathematicians here: LaGrange interpolation will create a polynomial that will exactly fit any set of data points. If you had ten data points, there is a ninth degree (or less) polynomial that will go precisely through every one of them. Yeah, there are other uses, but that will remain between me and Spike.

[Spike1007]

I "discovered" my own share of things too. I was always a big fan of reinventing the wheel.

[Naboka]

Think moving the recycle threshold to 700 points on 4x4 is proving to be advantageous. (Probably so for the 1,000 point 5x5 also.)

Gives us a chance to steal unusual words from the exotic lands of the ultrahigh ASPG players.

Of course, those are intended words. There have always been those mistyped or randomly typed letters that produced unintended but unusual words.

[jeepiegirl]

These crazy new words are not for me. 16-letter words? Obviously engineered and while I don't find that wrong, and I suppose I understand, that stuff isn't for me. Same with all the emphasis from some players on winning and setting records, only playing a puzzle to find the longest word, getting 600 words or 1000 points a game, etc.

I played real word games with my mother, both of us word freaks, for many years. She gradually lost her abilities and died in 2005. When I found this game in 2009 or 2010 I was overjoyed! The early game was not much attended to so that sometimes there would be more than 300 plays on a single puzzle! I played just to play so while it was frustrating, I was always measuring myself against myself- inexact of course but that's what I enjoyed. It's still what I enjoy. I choose puzzles based on how I'm feeling at the moment, and if I see my name on a puzzle already I play it to see if I can beat the score. Otherwise, I just do the best I can in all categories.

Word games are just plain fun and stimulate the brain, and that's all I'm looking for. No judging or ranting here- everyone should play games however they choose. I just wanted to put my thoughts out there and share my love of word games. LOVE WordTwist- that's for sure.

[floppers]

Totally not word related...perhaps a mathematical dilemma..also not junk but fun stuff. You may be aware that whilst the people I made have names, and nicknames, I generally refer to them by birth order number. Offspring 1, 2, 3, and 4. SO...Offspring 2 made a person of her own (yaay!). He has been named (Joey Loyal), but I am at a loss as to the number he should be allocated. As many of you are gifted in this area, I seek your learned suggestions.

[Spike1007]

How about 2.1?

[floppers]

hmmm.....definitely worth consideration...I was thinking that he could be gifted a power ? H, Offspring2, "2er" is the base, then Joey could be represented with an exponent, which leaves room for all the Offspring to have more...I'm concerned that it could make things complicated though...maybe the factor should be represented with a letter....sigh...where is coffee when you need it?

[bwt1213]

The mathematical notation would be the first derivative at the value 2: f'(2). Subsequent offspring would be the second derivative, etc. When my first daughter was born, the math department (I was in grad school at the time) was given birth announcements noting that she was our first derivative.

[Naboka]

Totally not word related...perhaps a mathematical dilemma..also not junk but fun stuff. You may be aware that whilst the people I made have names, and nicknames, I generally refer to them by birth order number. Offspring 1, 2, 3, and 4. SO...Offspring 2 made a person of her own (yaay!). He has been named (Joey Loyal), but I am at a loss as to the number he should be allocated. As many of you are gifted in this area, I seek your learned suggestions.

Perhaps you've boxed yourself in with numbers

which prevents imagination from taking flight.

Secundogeniture has to do with rights of the second born.

But, that's just awkward... and definitely not quirky.

Yet, historically applicable.

So, maybe S1 for the second born's first. S2, S3, S4 for their siblings.

O for one, or U for uno gives Offspring 1 O1, O2, O3, O4. Or U1, U2, U3.

T for 3.

Q for 4.

[Spike1007]

The mathematical notation would be the first derivative at the value 2: f'(2). Subsequent offspring would be the second derivative, etc. When my first daughter was born, the math department (I was in grad school at the time) was given birth announcements noting that she was our first derivative.

I like the derivative. For brevity though, 2' could just be used.

[floppers]

So, maybe S1 for the second born's first. S2, S3, S4 for their siblings.

O for one, or U for uno gives Offspring 1 O1, O2, O3, O4. Or U1, U2, U3.

T for 3.

Q for 4.

Thank you for your kind input, I think I'm going here for now...it provides a bit of a mystery for all of the Offspring, one which they may not be able to solve unless the provide themselves, or each other for further clues, by way of making more people. I think 4 will be particularly pleased with the Q.

[lalatan]

floppers, congratulations on your promotion from M1 to GM1 (Mum1 to Grandma1).