/sci/ - Science & Math

If f(x) is differentiable for all x, then f(x)=0 and f(x)=x+c are the only solutions

For any constant b:
f(x)+f(b)=f(f(x)+b)
f(x)=f(f(x)+b)-f(b)
f'(x)=f'(f(x)+b)*f'(x)

For f'(x)≠0:
f'(x)=f'(f(x)+b)*f'(x)
1=f'(f(x)+b) //f' is invariant
f'(x)=1
f(x)=x+c
Then:
f(a)+f(b)=f(f(a)+b)
(a+c)+(b+c)=((a+c)+b+c)
a+b+2c≡a+b+2c, so true for all c
So: f(x)=x+c

For f'(x)=0:
f'(x)=0
f(x)=c
Then:
f(a)+f(b)=f(f(a)+b)
c+c=c, so c=0
So: f(x)=0

1/2

Intelligence has various definitions and there is no consensus among the researchers about which one is right.

Howard Gardner proposed his theory of multiple intelligences in 1980's and it is largely supported by other people than psychologists and intelligence researchers. The theory suggests that there are many different intelligences such as interpersonal (ie. social), bodily-kinesthetic and musical intelligences. Gardner suggests that there are in total nine kind of intelligences and that each type of intelligence is independent of other intelligence "modality". Therefore, one could possess great mathematical talent and could still be very poor at visual-spatial tasks. Many people (especially teachers) like this theory because it implies that everyone can be intelligent in his/her own way. However, the scientific evidence is lacking and there is very little empirical proof to this theory. Almost all credible intelligence researchers dismiss this theory altogether.

The g-hypothesis (or the theory of general intelligence) has by far the largest empirical support. According to this theory, there are no different kind of intelligences and is in a way the opposite of Gardner's theory. The theory of general intelligence proposes that the different intelligence types of Gardner actually correlate strongly with each other, and that that there is a single intelligence factor (general intelligence ie. g) that predicts people's performance across situations. There is a strong psychometric evidence of g, and it is by far the most important predictor of life success and job performance. The arguments against the theory of general intelligence are usually not based on scientific support but rather on appeal to emotion - because g makes intelligence easily measurable, it makes it painfully clear that some people are much smarter than some people.

Since y'all are retarded brainlets seeking for ingroup approval and see an attack on the scientific validity of climate change as an attack of personal identity, I will show you my problem with climate change:
>Climate change makes for shorter winters
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/95188/20151016/winter-will-be-shorter-over-the-next-century-thanks-to-global-warming.htm
>Climate change makes for harsher winters
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/26/global-warming-has-doubled-risk-harsh-winters-eurasia-research-finds
>Climate change means less snow
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-the-independent.pdf
>Climate change means more snow
http://phys.org/news/2011-03-global-snowstorms-scientists.html
>Climate change causes droughts in California
http://earthsky.org/earth/has-global-warming-worsened-california-drought
>Climate change causes floods in Texas and Oklahoma
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/sep/02/global-warming-intensified-the-record-floods-in-texas-and-oklahoma
>Climate change makes wet places wetter and dry places drier…
https://www.ncas.ac.uk/index.php/en/climate-science-highlights/463-wet-regions-getting-wetter-dry-regions-drier-as-planet-warms
>…except when it makes wet places dryer…
http://www.earthday.org/blog/2015/07/15/unusual-drought-thailand-makes-high-vulnerability-climate-change-evident
>…and dry places wetter
http://mashable.com/2015/10/05/south-carolina-floods-global-warming/

CS is literally the field for innovation. Our current methods are crude and inefficient. All you brainlets calling CS a meme are just mad that you're unable to think of something new.

APOLOGIZE

nigger

They are stupid and psychotic and believe in fiction materials yet have the audacity to be rude to me and act as if I'm stupid when in objective reality they are just too retarded for me to possibly communicate with due to their general oblivion.

>>9893905