@Jennifer:
@rjclayton:
But the probability that you have calculated is .32476215 for Infantry on attack and .12978248 for fighters on attack. 8 decimal places. That you chose to display them as a percentage does not change the fact that the probability is to 8 decimal places.
It’s two integers with 6 decimals. You could make it a fraction too, does that mean there are NO decimals now? After all, 32.476215% is just 32476215/100000000 and that is NO decimals.
Hmm……
So yes, decimal places are counted by the number of places filled to the RIGHT of the decimal and not the integers to the LEFT of teh decimal.
I should know, after all, I only TEACH this stuff and have passed numerous state certifications to teach this stuff and classes in learning this stuff. You can twist it and turn it, but I can just reverse the twists and turns and twist and turn it to the same degree in the other direction. But it all boils down to 6 decimals (AKA the number of integers to the right of the decimal) is what mathematicians generally consider to be an accurate number. Does that mean 8 decimals is less accurate? No. 8 decimals are obviously MORE accurate. But no one is going to calculate 8 decimals by hand.
Oo, I am invited to “twist it and turn it”. Innuendo aside, is that implied support for state certifications, and thereby, the system upon which state certifications are based?
Who are these mathematicians that consider six decimal places to be accurate? Obviously those that are constrained by others to limit the precision with which those calculations can be reported. As such, those mathematicians can no longer really be considered “mathematicians” in the pure sense, can they?