Timeline for Can I detect the point of impact without looking at it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2010 at 2:53 | comment | added | Andrew Stacey | ... (ctd) Thus, for example, I first probe with (x,y) -> y to get the y-value, and then based on that information I pick some other f (e.g. if y has some non-zero derivative, I can pick (x,y) -> xy). Is that any clearer? (I've also added a comment to the question to hopefully make it a little clearer.) | |
| Mar 27, 2010 at 2:52 | comment | added | Andrew Stacey | I've voted for your answer because of your comment! I think that answers that expose vagueness are worthwhile. I do have a mild problem with the answer: to know what function to use, I have to know c already, which means that I know what c is! But more fundamentally, I'm trying to define the set of possible curves but to do what you suggest I need to already know it. In addition, whilst I can pick f how I like, I can only really pick it based on prior information from other f's. (ctd ...) | |
| Mar 27, 2010 at 1:46 | comment | added | Bjorn Poonen | @Tom: I had misread the sentence before the blockquote as requiring $f(0,0)=0$, but after re-reading, I think that he is not requiring this, so you are right. Your solution is even better! Anyway, I did not mean for this to be an obnoxious answer, but rather one that would encourage Andrew to make precise what he is really looking for (since I am sure it is not this!) | |
| Mar 27, 2010 at 1:18 | comment | added | Tom Church | If you're willing to commit such abuses, why not just let $f$ be the constant function $u_c$? | |
| Mar 27, 2010 at 0:20 | history | answered | Bjorn Poonen | CC BY-SA 2.5 |