Quote:
Originally posted by Night Stalker:
quote:
Originally posted by Gabrielles blades:
there is an oldest 'one' in the case of 1 6 6
in cases of twins people seem to note which one came out a few seconds before, and so say hes/shes the older one.
|
But this time is insignificant when taking the unit of measure (whole years) and level of persision (0 decimal places) in considderation. Jeesh, like Vask said, way to be too nit-picky ... 
[/QUOTE]/shrug, i suppose it might be nitpicky, but consider your own logic.
There is an assumption in the logic of this problem as solved by the math teacher. It naturally did have to do with the fact that he was a math teacher and so the math teacher would assume that a few seconds difference in birthing is insignificant.
So, when accounting for the unit of measure (years), the few seconds is insignificant. With this assumption of insignificance you would have only one oldest since according to a rounding of the years you would have 6 = 6.00001
as a true statement.
However, since the clincher of the question is not a mathematical matter, one would use non mathematical logic. ie, it doesnt matter how insignificant the age difference, there is still a difference that parents and children tend to actually note.
the problem to me has no solution if you dont use that assumption.
and yes there are places where supposedly insignificant numbers can have enormous ramifications even in scholastic pursuits (ie physics classes).