skip to main |
skip to sidebar
## Monday, October 30, 2006

## About Me

## Blog Archive

## Social Security Archives

## Posts by Topic

## Disclaimer

Dartmouth, Of Course, Was His Nirvana

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

- academia (44)
- airlines (23)
- blogging (46)
- budget policy (40)
- civil rights (15)
- courts (14)
- Dartmouth (54)
- economists (33)
- education (11)
- energy (26)
- entertainment (1)
- environment (10)
- finance (30)
- foreign policy (10)
- health care (26)
- housing (10)
- humor (12)
- immigration (16)
- income inequality (8)
- international trade (7)
- labor markets (46)
- macroeconomics (46)
- media (33)
- microeconomics (49)
- military (15)
- new hampshire (15)
- pensions (17)
- philanthropy (8)
- politics (100)
- public policy (65)
- que? (13)
- saving (8)
- science (9)
- social security (84)
- sports (15)
- tax policy (39)
- technology (7)
- terrorism (20)
- travel (14)

This is a personal weblog. None of the opinions expressed here should be construed to represent the opinions of Dartmouth College, the Rockefeller Center, or any other group with which I am affiliated.

## 5 comments:

If she agreed, she was mastered Fuzzy Math!

You should ask your colleague Jon Skinner about the quadratic equation and his 15 minutes of fame (infamy?) as the butt of some criticism in Spy magazine. Of course, he was correct.

This would be

muchfunnier if the first equation were actually valid. Think back to calculus--the first statement is only true if we put a "+" superscript on the "8" under the "LIM". In other words, the right-hand limitisinfinity, but the left-hand limit is negative infinity. Because the left-hand and right-hand limits are unequal, the statement is not valid.Yes,

muchfunnier.Thanks for the correction.

At least to math geeks like us, eh?

Post a Comment