Cursing, Swearing, using Bad Words, NO BIG DEAL! REALY!

Cursing, Swearing, using Bad words, no big deal! Really!

I have always held that there are no such things as bad words. As such, I will use many of them in this post. If you get offended by such words, then please, stay, because this is for you. I will address the use of swear words in as many forms as I can remember and show why they are no big deal.

There are three ways in which swears words are considered bad.

1. Words are socially unacceptable
2. Words are hijacked from original meanings to mean something deragatory
3. And most commonly, they are "bad" words because of ones faith or religion

All three purposes are simply not valid and I will show why. And for number three, I will show why it is not valid to say one particular word is bad, biblically. Oh yes, I can argue from the bible as well.

1. Some words are bad because they are socially acceptable.

I have to admit, this is possibly! the worst argument I have ever heard. When I was a christian, I still had a major problem with this. Why? Because words have meaning, and meaning is what is important, no particular word. If I were to call you a mother fucker, you would likely be highly offended. But what if I said "you enjoy intimate relations with your mom"? Now, you would likely think about it for a moment then be upset, but it doesn't have the same power as "mother fucker" because you believe that some how "mother fucker" is a bad word.

If I say "fuck you", you will inherently get more upset than if I were to say "screw you" or "violate you" or "do you in the rear". The last two are likely to illicit a law instead of anger. But why? They mean the same thing, and have the same linguistic value as "fuck you" does. When you give words more power based on the sound it makes coming out of someones mouth, you denigrad the meaning and value of words by making one word better or worse than a! nother. You wouldn't the term "they" is better than "them" wo! uld you? They mean virtually the same thing. We should apply the same logic to all words. Instead of specific sounds being offensive, we need to look at the meaning of a word. I assure you I can say much more offensive things without the so called "bad words". There is nothing more ridiculous than completely insulting someone without one cuss word then having them get upset at "fuck you". We get upset at these particular words and not others because we UNDERSTAND what they mean. Other language is often not fully understood and doesn't convey the feelings to people any more, like cuss words do.

Thus, in society, we decided that, since we don't like these feelings being conveyed, that we can demonize the words that convey them. Whats worse, words in a society, and in meaning, change over time. If you went back 200 years ago and told King George "Fuck You" he wouldn't have the slightest idea what you were talking about. Phrases that have to universal meaning cannot! be held as bad. In 100 years, we won't know what the phrase means either. So what you are doing is picking one set of words that convey a specific meaning in any given society time table, and deciding they are bad. That simply is not acceptable. Meaning is important. Meaning and the feelings conveyed are more important than the actual words used. Which leads me to point number 2.

2. Some words are bad even though they have valid definitions of use.

Bitch, bastard, ass hole. All these types of words have valid meanings associated with them. A bitch is a female dog. A bastard is a son born whose father is not known, and ass is an animal. But they have been hijacked, once again, for the feelings they convey, and by consequence, making them "bad words". Not long ago, I did a random test on some people I knew. I didn't tell them at first, but I did after words. I told one of the women she was a bitch. She immediately got upset at me. Didn'! t slap me, but she wanted to. I told another woman separately! that sh e was acting like a female dog. She laughed and said she supposed she was. (she happens to be one that thinks swearing is wrong). I did the same with some male co-workers with "bastard". The one called bastard felt hurt and got upset, the one who I used the definition on, said he had no father, didn't even blink. And finally, I called one of my friends an ass hole in anger, and the other a butt hole in anger. You guessed it, the one who I called butt hole just apologize (he didn't need to, I set him up) and the one I called ass hole immediately got defensive and angry.

Words have meaning. That meaning is why we get upset. But in place of discerning what someone is saying, we have put in a set of words that are considered "bad words" so that we know what feelings are being conveyed and know when to properly get upset or offended. The problem is that now the words themself are offensive separate from their meanings. If I call you a donkeys butt, or a but! t hole, or an ass hole, all three should illicit the same response, but that simply doesn't happen. The demonizing of specific words has, in a way dumbed down our society. Or perhaps, it is just a symtom of that dumbing down. Either way, in the case of these type of words, they cannot be bad words because they are still valid in use of very real things. If I say bitch, why should that get someone more angry than a female dog? They are the same thing, and bitch is still used in dog shows and by dog trainers today. Another word, hell, is sometimes demonize, like when someone says "what the hell" or "go to hell". How can a word be a "bad word" when that word is in the bible? The bible is the most widely read book among those of faith in our country today. Yet most who read it would list "hell" as a bad word. That doesn't even make sense. It is the feelings conveyed, the idea conveyed, that should be what gets to people, not specific words, and especially not words that! have actual common uses.

3. Swear words are bad ! because the bible says so.

Now, this one is one of my favorites because it is simply a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge that causes this belief. Now, I could go into the myriad of ways in which "using gods name in vain" is specifically bad in the bible. I could go on about how "in vain" doesn't mean the same thing it does now, and that "in vain" is not as good a translation as "in a falsehood" according to the direct hebrew translation bible. This would mean that swearing in gods name, that is, making an oath in gods name, is what it is prohibiting. But thats not nearly as relevant. Why? Because, GOD is a generic term not used in the bible. God and Lord are not the names of God. In the Old Testament, God is given the name El half of the time, and Yahweh the other half of the time. Those of the Yahweh persuasion deemed his name so holy that it couldn't be written or spoken. Thus, in the original OT text, YHWH is written, not Yahweh. These are the names of ! god, and those are what you should not say in falsehood. God damn it, could mean any god or gods. God is a generic term used for any and every other deity. In english, we capitalize the word to mean THE god, by which we mean the christian god. This capitalization in no way indicates that this is the name of god. It is ignorant to say so! Thus god damn it cannot be taking "the name of the lord your god in vain" because you aren't using "the name of the lord your god in vain".

Moving to the new testament, christians like to quote Ephesians 4:29 "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.".
Now, to many, this means, no swearing. However, we have already discussed the problem with that. I can say something so foul and insulting that you should be left embarassed with out ever saying a "swear" word. So, is it okay to say somethin! g nasty as long as I don't swear? I have met many christians w! ho seem to think so. They never swear but they sure say some mean things about people and too them. Surely you can't think that the christian god is so lame and shallow as to think that only words deemed socially bad are things you can't say? No, that is a ridiculous premise. And until christians stop saying bad things about people in a nice or non-swear word laden way, they cannot claim this scripture for anything, especially swear words. The simple reality about this is this. If I say you are the best damn piano player in the whole fuckin world, that is a nice thing I just said about you. Nothing unwholesome was said of you. Yet if you are a christian, you are likely going to be offended. But I clearly didn't violate any religious principles in the bible. What I violated was your self installed, socially generated sense of what particular words are acceptable. And that is not enough to decide that one particular word, rather than what the words mean, is bad or offensive. !

Conclusion:

In the conclusion I want to address one further complaint about swearing. It is usually given by people who consider them selves intellectuals or intelligent. They like to say swear words are only used by those who aren't smart enough to articulate their feelings. That intelligent people don't need to use swear words. Well, I call them like I see them. And that is bull shit. As long as society views specific words as "bad" then they will continue to have a bigger impact on people than spelling out the actually feeling or action you wish to convey. If I say "I am very angry and am not going to do what you say no matter what you tell me so just leave me alone" it doesn't have the power that "kiss my ass!" does. As well, it shortens the discourse considerably when using swear words to convey feelings either in anger or in jest. Simply using one word over another, as long as it is in proper usage, does not make on inferior or less int! elligent. Fact is, if I don't use swear words, many people si! mply don 't understand what I just said. So in some ways, it is easier to communicate with people using swear words.

If we want to advance in our society, we must learn to get past such pettying labeling as "bad words". Words are just words. What I am MEANING is much more important than the actual words used. Words are a tool that, in and of themselves, cannot be inherently bad or good, they simply are. They are there to use when we need them to convey actions, requests, feelings, desires, pain, pleasure and so much more. The sooner we learn thes, the sooner we can move on to actually discussing issues that really matter, and give a big FUCK YOU to people whose only recourse in a discussion is to demonize the actual words you use, in place of real discussion.

big words and definitions

Snap Game for Factoring Trinomials

This game of Snap is one that your students can play on the computer to practice factoring trinomials. One card displaying a quadratic equation is shown, and the other pile of cards is made up of factors of quadratic equations. Cards from this pile are flipped over. You "snap" when the factors from a card in this pile match up to the quadratic equation shown. This would be easy to make up several  decks of cards for different students to play on their own for extra practice and a little fun competition.

Solving quadratic equations by factoring

Infinite Geometric Series

OVERVIEW:

• Finding the Sum of Numbers in a Sequence
• Sigma Notation
• Infinite geometric series Formula
  

Finding the Sum of Numbers in a Sequence

(a) What is the sum of the integers from 1 to 5000?

Credit to Paul for being our Gauss today.

We imagine the se! quence of all the numbers 1 to 5000 in the top row while the bottom row has all the numbers from 5000 to 1.

Example:
1, 2, 3, ... 5000
5000, 4999, 4998, ... 1

We find the sum of each column in our table and see that they're all 5001. Refer to slide 4 of June 3's slide for a better understanding of what I'm talking about.

We know that there are 5000 of these terms. We also know that if we want to find the sum of the integers between 1 to 5000, then we would have to multiply the number of terms by the total we have then divide by 2. We divided by 2 because there were two sequences we added.

Example: 5000 * 5001 / 2 = 12 502 500

Another way of solving this problem is to pull out the equation (found on June 3's slide #7) and plugging in the appropriate numbers, which Mr. K has a distaste for using this method because we're not really understanding the concept but just plugging numbers into an equation.

(b) What is the sum of all m! ultiples of 7 between 1 & 5000?

The lowest multiple of 7 between 1 and 5000 is 7.
The highest multiple of 7 between 1 and 5000 is 4998.
There are 714 terms that are multiples of 7 between 1 and 5000.

We then imagine, again, that table, listing all the numbers in the sequence from 1 to 5000 (that are multiples of 7) in the top row and all the numbers in the sequence from 5000 to 1 (that are multiples of 7) in the bottom row, and find the sum of each column.

Example:
7, 14, 21, ..., 4998
4998, 4991, 4984, ..., 7

Add the top row and the bottom row, and you find that under each column in our imaginary table is 5005.

We multiplied the number of multiples of 7 between 1 and 5000 by the sum of the first and last terms of the sequence and divided that by 2 because we've counted the sequence twice and we get 1 786 785.

(c) What is the sum of all integers from 1 to! 5000 inclusive that are not multiples of 7?

Well, we have the sum of all the integers from 1 to 5000. We have the sum of all the multiples of 7 between 1 and 5000. So if we find the difference of those two numbers, we find the sum of all the integers from 1 to 5000 inclusive that are not multiples of 7.

12 502 500 - 1 786 785 = 10 715 715

Sigma Notation

Left Question:

• The k = 1 means that you start with 1 and evaluate 3k.
• The! number above the sigma symbol, 4, means to keep evaluating 3k! until k = 4, then add all the terms.

Right Question:

• The k = 0 means that you start with 0 and evaluate 2^k.
• The number above the sigma symbol, 3, means to keep evaluating 2^k until k = 3, then add all the terms.

Then Mr. K says to find another sigma notation that is equivalent to the two questions on the slide. Of course, "mathematics is the science of patterns" is the common phrase that Mr. K always says, and yes, there're patterns here.

Also, a quick way of figuring out the answer to the sigma notation in question is to add the first and last term, then multiply by 2. Example: In the left question, [3(1) + 3(4)] * 2 = 30

Infinite geometric series Formula

The formula given in the above slide is something that we already derived from the previous class.

To answer the question "why is that the formula?" let's first use an example to help better our understanding of infinite geometric series. We make a square, cut it in half, and shade the half. We take the unshaded region of the square, cut that in half, and shade the half. Then we take another unshaded region of the square, cut that in half, and shade that half, and so on. So, firstly, we got 1/2 of the square shaded, then 1/2 + 1/4 shaded, then 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 shaded, then 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 s! haded, and so on. If we continue this pattern and keep cutting! and sha ding the square in half an infinite number of times, then we would've a shaded square.

1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 ... = 1

The formula that we derived from the previous class was

Sn = t1*(1-r^infinity) / (1-r)

If we take r and raise it to the power of infinity, that would equal zero.
Example: r = 1/2

1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 ... = 0

So, in the part of the formula where it says (1-r^infinity), that part of the formula is going to equal (1-0) = 1 anyways, and multiplying a number by 1 won't really have a visible effect. It's more efficient to just not include the (1-r^infinity) into the formula.

Plug in the numbers into the equation, BING! BANG! BOOM! you have the result. Have a nice day.


END NOTES

• Start on Exercise 47: Infinite geometric series. You should have finish! ed all the questions in the exercise book up to 47.
  
• Tomorrow, we will finish off the lesson the infinite geometric series.
  
• Hopefully, we will be on task and finish the course tomorrow, and do a review on Friday.
  
• Next scribe is Francis.

geometric series

Celebrating teamwork and mathematical problem solving

Quest of 3 genome musketeers
Pals who transformed biomedical research share Albany Med prize

By CATHLEEN F. CROWLEY, Albany Times Union Staff writer

ALBANY -- Three good friends reunited Friday at Albany Medical Center. Three decades ago, they were the cheerleaders and the brains! behind the effort to map the human genome.

On Friday, they picked up the Albany Medical Prize in Medicine and Biomedical Research, which at $500,000 is the largest cash prize in medicine in the United States.

A few minutes into their "grand rounds" lecture -- a formal medical tradition where wisdom is shared among colleagues -- a voice announced over the Albany Med loudspeaker that fire alarm testing would begin immediately.

The scientists roared with laughter.

"We are the three genome musketeers," said Dr. Francis S. Collins, "We've been setting off fire alarms for 30 years."

In a nutshell: David Botstein, a geneticist, was one of the first people to suggest the idea of mapping the human genome; Eric Steven Lander, a mathematician, created new algorithms for analyzing genes and mapping complex multiple-gene diseases; and Collins, a physician and biologist, created faster mapping ! techniques and eventually oversaw the world-wide Human Genome ! Project from a post within the National Institutes of Health.

"They collectively unlocked and then opened the door that had previously barred us from understanding disease processes at the most basic genetic level," said James J. Barba, president of Albany Med.

Eric Lander, the mathematician on the prize winning team (pictured at left above), got a running start in developing his mathematical problem skills, as well as his teamwork and leadership skills, as a leader of his math team at Stuyvesant High School in New York City. The USA Math Olympiads were just starting up when he was in high school, and he was among the first Americans to take those contests and to represent the USA at the International Math Olympiad in 1974.

This coming Tuesday and Wednesday, 300 students across the country will be taking the USA Math Olympiads. Six of the highest scoring students will follow in Eric Landers' hig! h school footsteps and qualify to represent our country at the 2010 International Math Olympiad to be held in Kazakhstan in July.

Congratulations and best wishes for a great adventure in problem solving in the coming weeks to all the students writing the USAMO this week, especially those from New York State, listed below, and--of course, especially to the five students from Albany Area Math Circle.

We know that the problem solving skills that all our New York State mathletes have already demonstrably acquired can be put to many important uses in the future. Our state and our country and our world have many problems to solve.

Albany Area Math Circle, Niskayuna NY:
Andrew Ardito
Matthew Babbitt
David Bieber (Niskayuna High School)
Schuyler Smith
Felix Sun (Shenendahoah High School)

Columbia Grammar & Prep School New York NYReed LaFleche

Comsewogue High School Port Jefferson NY
David Lawrence

Corning-Painted Post West High School Painted Post NY
Vasily Kuksenkov

Garden City High School, Garden City NY
Jan Gong

Great Neck South High School, Great Neck NY
Keaton Stubis

Hackley School Tarrytown NY
Michael Celentano

High School for Math, Sci & Engineering New York NY
Mo Lam

Hunter College High School New York NY
Andre Arslan
Meena Boppana
Paul Handorff
Bohao Zhou

New Hyde Park Memorial High School Hyde Park NY
Michael Hodgson

Penfield High School Penfield NY
Allen Liu

Stuyvesant High School New York NY
Milo Beckman
Junghwa Cha
Lijin Chen
Daniel Mendelsohn
Joseph Park Joseph
Yevginey Rudoy
Andrew Ryba
Zachary Young

The Dalton School New York NY
Alexander Iriza

Vestal Senior High School Vestal NY
Colin Lu

area of circles problems

New Rosources within/for the BSI Network

The Bay Area Learning Network is one of the inaugural networks created to support professional learning in the 110 California community colleges. In 2009 building on its previous successes, the BSI now plans to integrate what has already been accomplished with a new pilot, growing into a self-sustaining, statewide, professional learning Network intended to promote overall systemic change. This will allow faculty, staff, and administrators to share and build upon existing knowledge while at the same time creating opportunities for transformation. Foundational to this Network are evidence-based knowledge building, inquiry, capacity building, direct training, and resource development. To build the pilot Network, coordinators have been assigned to four specific locations (Bay Ar! ea, Los Angeles, Sacramento/Central Valley, and San Diego). These coordinators will facilitate efforts in the local regions, while at the same time providing connections with the greater statewide network.

Along the same lines, the Professional Development Consortium at Solano College is in the process of creating a centralized archive of professional development and focused inquiry resources. A temporary archive of interesting things to read can be found here. Please pass along anything else you come across that you think others will benefit from reading or looking at!

Other sites of interest:
https://www.innovativeeducators.org/
http://oncourseworkshop.com/
http://www.weeklyinnovations.org/

Preliminary Algebra | Online elementary algebra 1

Binomial Test of Significance

The binomial test of significance is a kind of probability test that is based on various rules of probability. The binomial test of significance is used to examine the distribution of a single dichotomous variable in the case of small samples. The binomial test of significance involves the testing of the difference between a sample proportion and a given proportion.

Statistics Solutions is the country's leader in binomial tests of significance and dissertation statistics. Contact Statistics Solutions today for a free 30-minute consultation.!

This document will discuss certain terms used in the binomial test of significance so that the reader can better understand the binomial test of significance.

The calculation of the binomial test of significance is done in the following manner:

Let us assume that p(r) is to be calculated in the binomial test of significance. In the binomial test of significance, p(r) is the probability that the researcher will obtain an ‘r’ observation in one category of a dichotomy and the researcher will obtain an! ‘n – r’ observations in the other category,! when th e sample size is n. In the binomial test of significance, if ‘p’ is the probability that the researcher will obtain the first category, and ‘q’ is equal to ‘1 – p,’ then it denotes the probability that the researcher will obtain the second category. The formula for the calculation of the binomial test of significance is given by the following:

p(r) = _nC_r*p_r*q_n-r = (n!p_rq_n-r)/(r!(n-r)!)

In this formula of the binomial test of significance, _nC_r is denoted as the number of combinations of n things drawn from ‘r’ at a time.

The normal approximation of the binomial test of significance is made in following manner:

When the size of the sample ‘n’ is greater than 25, and the probability ‘p’ of obtaining the first category is around 0.50, then product of the term ‘npq’ in the binomial test of significance is at least 9. In this case, the binomial distribution approximates the normal distribution in the binomial test of significance. Because of this approximation, a normal curve z-test is used as an approximation of the binomial test of significance. This formula of the approximation of the binomial test of significance is given by the following:

z = ((r[+,-].5)! - np)/S QRT(npq)

The binomial test of significance can be done in SPSS. This non parametric test is calculated in SPSS by selecting “Non Parametric test” from the “analyze” menu and then selecting “binomial test of significance.”

There are certain assumptions that are made in the binomial test of significance. The assumptions are the following:

A dichotomous kind of a distribution is assumed in the binomial test o! f significance. In other words, in the binomial test of significance, it is assumed that the variable of interest is considered to be dichotomous in nature where the two values are mutually exclusive and mutually exhaustive in all cases being considered. The word ‘binomial’ in the binomial test of significance suggests that the variables of interest should be dichotomous in nature as the term ‘binomial’ means two.

Since this binomial test of significance does not involve any parameter and therefore is non parametric in nature, the assumption that is made about the distribution in the parametric test is therefore not assumed in the binomial test of significance.

In the binomial test of significance, it is ! assumed that the sample that has been drawn from some populati! on is do ne by the process of random sampling. The sample on which the binomial test of significance is conducted by the researcher is therefore a random sample.

Binomial probability formula

Creating Columns in Articles

I was going to write a blog about this subject, but I found someone else blog that already does it. Rather than be a jerk and steal his (or her) content, I'll just link to it.

http://texblog.wordpress.com/2007/08/11/creating-two-columns-in-article-report-or-book/

The only thing I would add is that, for anybody that uses the \textwidth variable, it still refers to the width of the page, and not the width of the column, so use \columnwidth instead.

Equation of a Line