/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4301689
That's what I meant

>>4269669
Well?

>>4227351
No.

Besides, Gallileo was lambasted for publishing, not commenting. Do you think scientific papers should be written anonymously?

>>3246978
>those PSAs

oh fuck no no no

>>3240623
It's like they looked right into me.

>>2945668
>gargle on request

>>2777433
>Sharp teeth to cut vegetation
>Vegetation not alive

>mfw

could somebody help me with

2^(2x) - 3 * 2^(x) - 40 = 0

I know the answer is 3, but I don't know how to show it...

/sci/ I got a problem.

I had to do a entrepreneurial deal for a class elective. I decided I would get my group to make a seed which worked on the idea of selling a semi-hydrophobic artificial polymer coat which would allow timed germination.

It has papers backing the technique as being legit, just inefficient. So I figured it would be a great thing to capitalize on for money.

But my marketing teacher says my groups writing was too technical for her. She didn't understand the work and said she had to return ours next week when she had properly read through it.

But I didn't even write the whole report. I gave my technical bit, which was understandable, to another guy in my group so he could assemble all the report pieces the group did into something legitimate and coherent. So at the very least she should have understood what my other group member understood.

Why the hell would would a university teacher not know simple things like hydrophobic? Could she dock grades for not understanding something?