Calculators, those little electronic things which do complex math equations in your head, display lines on an LED display, and cost anywhere from $10-$200. Are they making the world dumber, or are they displaying man's ingenuity?
My view:
Making the world dumber. I used to use calculators, but now I don't. When I used to use calculators, I KNEW what was happening at every button press. I knew how to do equations without any calculator, I only preferred it because it had speed. I believe they slow down thinking processes, which in turn make you think much less.
The problem with people isn't that there are calculators; It is that schools don't force anybody NOT to use calculators at ANY time. This alone makes kids familiar with pressing five buttons and getting the correct answer. Kids don't know what happen with every single key stroke. I don't know what the statistics are, but many people at my school are not familiar with the term 'long division.' They just use calculators, and most of the smarter people in schools don't use calculators. Smarter people in many schools are few and far between. People generations before us did not use such devices, would this make them smarter?
Now, your views?
Try to solve 123456789^131 without a decent calculator.
They make some people dumber, and for others simply improve speed of calculation and calculating otherwise incalculatable problems (shown above).
Calculators are only necessary for things that would otherwise be impossible for humans to solve. Not like the problem he mentioned, but things where you have to take the limit of infinity.
Think you can calculate sin(12pi) without a calculator?
Calculators are much faster at many things, such as integrating.
And sin(12pi) = 0. No calculator needed. 
Now do that using the formula for sin when people didn't know about the unit circle.
O RLY?
Well, when you get around im going to say algebra Id like to see you never use a calculator.
(unless you want to not be able to finish your test because your so damn effing slow.)
QUOTE(CheeZe @ Mar 1 2006, 06:51 PM)
Now do that using the formula for sin when people didn't know about the unit circle.
[right][snapback]437212[/snapback][/right]
SOHCAHTOA:
Sine=Opposite/Hypotenuse
Cosine=Adjacent/Hypotenuse
Tangent=Opposite/Adjacent
Simple.
QUOTE(n2o-SiMpSoNs @ Mar 1 2006, 07:17 PM)
O RLY?
Well, when you get around im going to say algebra Id like to see you never use a calculator.
(unless you want to not be able to finish your test because your so damn effing slow.)
[right][snapback]437239[/snapback][/right]
I AM in Algebra I, and I get all A's on everything and I am usually one of the few people done first. I am wishing for Algebra II honors. No, I am not a genius or an autistic savant.
I'm in Algebra II honors also.
.. I mean the
real formula.

Calculators are here to solve stuff in seconds which takes a much longer time by hand, like sine, cosine, tangent, cotangent, secant, cosecant, logarithms, etc. Still, a person has to know the process of finding an answer so using a calculator doesn't always gaurantee a correct answer. Not using a calculator probably will brain fry you after a while. Many teachers show the process of a math problem by hand before using a calculator anyways to show students why an identity, equation, etc. is true. Honestly, how many jobs require somebody to know every aspect of math? I don't think it's making people more stupid, I think it's getting the job done much quicker.
I think calculators are awesome. They let you program. It is really cool how it really introduce you to the real web programming which I will do as a part time job soon.
A calculator should be used only when you are at a level of thinking and understandment for that you will only use one for massif numbers that could take a very long time calculatng. As long as you can think fast and straight, you could sue a calculator.
Our school teaches what each button does and what happens when we press it. But I think it does make you a little dumber... or at least forget things. I myself have forgotten how to do long division... or long multiplication. Infact I really dont add, subtract, multiply, or divide anything on paper anymore.
In many cases, calculators make humans dumber as in not as efficient when doing simple, yet complex, multiplication or division or whatever problems because of your lack of practice in practicing doing those problems on paper and showing your work.
well yea...calculators are for people that are just too lazy thinking up their own answers to solve a simple arithmetic problem...i do think they are making people dumber in a sense...just makes people lazy and not think...but calculators are necessary tools for the advanced stuff like calculus/college matrix mathematics...the stuff you can't really solve by your own by just writing them down but it does takes complex formulae.
I use calculators for the big numbers but can still do them in my head. It justs takes longer.
QUOTE(dumbducky @ Mar 2 2006, 02:04 PM)
I use calculators for the big numbers but can still do them in my head. It justs takes longer.
[right][snapback]437639[/snapback][/right]
Exactly
I think it's going both ways. Right now I'm in Algebra I and I can't stand it. When we are taking a test, on solving basic equations, with numbers no higher than 10, people complain that the math is too hard and ask to use calculators. Sure, they're already retarded, but it's not like -5-2=? is that hard of an f'ing problem. I mean, the test was review from 8th grade material.
And calculators are helpful. There are a lot of problems I'd rather not do in my head, just because it's too long/time consuming, yet I could do it if I want.
HOPEFULLY, once I take the Geometry summer course I can find myself a spot in Algebra II Honors. If that doesn't work out, I don't mind taking Algebra II CP.
QUOTE
Calculators are only necessary for things that would otherwise be impossible for humans to solve. Not like the problem he mentioned, but things where you have to take the limit of infinity.
Is there a formula for solving problems like that quickly and easily? I need to know that -_-.
I agree with dumbducky.
QUOTE(n2o-SiMpSoNs @ Mar 1 2006, 07:17 PM)
O RLY?
Well, when you get around im going to say algebra Id like to see you never use a calculator.
(unless you want to not be able to finish your test because your so damn effing slow.)
[right][snapback]437239[/snapback][/right]
I'm in algebra II honors and I have yet to need to use a calculator, save finding my grade in the class. We're taught with low numbers, usually no higher than 100 so we understand the concepts, but don't have to do much simple arithmatic. Right now we're doing imaginary numbers. One Theorm goes as follows:
Where z = complex number (x + yi)
|z| = √(x[sup]2[/sup] + y[sup]2[/sup])
Sovle:
{z: z = 4-3i}
|z| = √[4[sup]2[/sup] + (-3)[sup]2[/sup]]
|z| = √(16 + 9)
|z| = √(25) or |z| = √(5[sup]2[/sup])
|z| = 5
z = ±5
Try solving that with {z: z = 324-564i} without a calculator.
Teachers need to start small and stay small. They're relying more and more on calculators, which in turn is screwing up the kids.
We have to get graphing calculators (TI-84 Plus Special Edition to be be exact) because the things we do would be impossibly hard to do without them, plus the things we do with calculators are things that are pointless to learn the long way because if you actually use it in real life then you'll probably be using one.
QUOTE(CheeZe @ Mar 1 2006, 05:04 PM)
.. I mean the
real formula.

[right][snapback]437276[/snapback][/right]
We didn't have infinite power series before the unit circle. Before the unit circle, it's called take a protractor and a ruler and measure it.well at my school, the teacher makes us do our work on our homeowork, and if he sees us using it in class, he like gives us a detention. and we can only use them during test when he says we can.

I would die without my calculator. No way i would survive physics without it. Or geometry, no way i could do any trigonometry without it.
Nothing wrong with a calculator. Even if it is doing 13 + 64. As long as you understand what you're doing....
and there's no way i'd be able to graph a rational function without one;)