/lit/ - Literature

is this a joke? litteral high school tier problem

>numbers
>real

But why would that ever be the case? Why do maths geeks fail to realise their problems don't correlate with reality?

Bringing zero and negative numbers into a discussion about philosphy is cringe as fuck.

>>14035192
solve it thenyou smug prick

>>14035185
Logicism got btfo by godel along time ago

>>14035211
Why do you need someone else to solve it for you? Answer in numbers.

>>14035209
>Why do maths geeks fail to realise
>maths geeks
>a literal 9th grade 1 minute exercise

/lit/ is not a place to solve your high school homework instead

>>14035231
instead of you*

>>14035209
>their problems don't correlate with reality?

Imagine being this ignorant

>>14035209
Get off my board U.G. Quentin

>>14035185

How is the derivative even defined over -2 < x < -1 when the domain of the mapping is limited to -1 < x < -1 ? Your question is nonsensical.

>>14035251
>our question is nonsensical.
nah ur just not woke

>>14035251
Based

>>14035297
Cringe

>>14035185
Now this is shitposting

>>14035245

Explain what makes it relevant then.

>>14035412

Mathematics can fully describe reality.

>>14035467

No, it doesn't. Basic maths, yes, can help make a logical approach clear, but there's a reason why ethics and politics came to be. Start bringing in 0 and negative numbers, infinity and everything else and you're just a bunch of cultists.

Back up your claim.

>>14035513
Not him
Numbers and operations are a MODEL of quantities that try to descrive the real world, I'll give you that. But they do correlate with reality, if it were not the case physics and maths wouldn't go so well together.

>>14035513
>what is physics

>>14035251
If you take the derivative of f(x) though it could give real outputs for -2<x<1, no?

>>14035185
>tfw you discover the demiurge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0ToF8cGRCM

>>14035229
Which is why it's so cringy to bring it up to try and assert some kind of intellectual dominance..

>>14035526
>>14035527

I'm not doubting that mathematics has application, but I said THEIR problems.
I mean these mathematicians and people like OP that say "solve this" like it isn't just a contrived problem with it's own rules.

>>14035538

The function f(x) is not defined for x smaller than or equal to -1. Because its is explicitly said so by "where -1 < x < 1", but also because the part Ln(1-x) doesn't make sense for x smaller than or equal to -1 (since Ln(0) or Ln of negative number does not exist).
Since the the function doesn't exist for x smaller than or equal to x = -1, its derivative also doesn't exist at those points. You could take the derivative for -1<x<1, but not for -2<x<-1.

>>14035538

I just got what you mean. Yes you could do that but you should probably rephrase the OP question to
> f(x) = Ln(3 + x) - Ln(1 - x) where -1 < x < 1. Show that f '(y) > 0 for -2 < y < 1.

>>14035564

Its isn't contrived though. Literal parts of our reality are described by this exact function.

>>14035606

Explain?

>>14035185
kek platonists on suicide watch

>>14035185
huh?

>>14035595
You really don't understand it? You are just substituting a y for an x and think it did change anything. I guess Plato wouldn't let you study philosophy.

>>14035564
>it's own
Holy fuck you are a brainlet.

>>14036335

grammar is not an argument

>>14036227
There's a joke about some brainlet doing algebra who says that "no, i is too small, let's use n instead".
This guy is kinda like that.

I just want to interrupt and say Plato never did a calculus problem in his life. He probably puzzled over the volume of conics.

>>14035513
Here's a number that can make ethics and politics more clear: 13%.....

Nothing to do with literature. Nothing to do with philosophy. You do not understand Platonism if you are trying to bring in high school math.

>Tfw mathelt and cant even understand this "high school" tier problem.


At least I dont need mathematics for a noose.... right?

>>14036487
sorry bro you'll need knot theory

>>14035595
It’s actually funny how stupid you are. The problem isn’t x or y, it’s the definition of f.

> tfw didn’t take Calculus in high school because AP Calc teacher was a cunt

I-is there still time for me? Can anyone rec me books? Is auditing a class a good idea?

>>14037073
Calculus is pointless and anything you will learn you will forgot in due time unless you consent to a life of insect technological slavery.

>>14035185
Seeing as your two domains are not the same, do you require an analytic continuation of the function beyond the original one? Oh what's that, you have no idea what that is because you just wanted to shitpost? Shocking.

>>14035185
>take the derivative of the natural logarithm of a negative number