/sci/ - Science & Math

Trigonometry.

Calculus and Linear Algebra

Farafay's law. I understand it mathematically but I just don't get the physical reason why a change in the magnetic flux causes voltage to be induced.

>>10336196
Try and describe what voltage is.

>>10336162
fiber bundles

When you integrate, the integral is the antiderivative evaluated at the upper bound minus the antiderivative evaluated at the lower bound - as if it ignores everything else in the middle. The Riemann integral makes perfect sense however.

Somebody enlighten me please.

Women

>>10336162
Why I can't build muscle.

>>10336241
probably because you are a mutt.

>>10336186
This

>>10336243
I'm 100% white

I understand the implications of epsilon delta proofs but I don't get how you just pick random values for it and it proves anything

>>10336162
How sexual reproduction between two different genders developed from monocellular division

>>10336222

The antiderivative "knows" what's going on in the middle.

The monty hall problem

>>10336162
why multiplication is hard to undo

>>10336251
sure pedro if you say so

>>10336222
>as if it ignores everything else in the middle
Ya, but if you changed the middle you'd have a different antiderivative, which gives new values on the corners.

>>10336222
It's the baby's first Stocks theorem, basically - the integral of a (exterior) derivative of a function (form) over a whole domain can be evaluated just by knowing the values of the initial function at the two points (the domain's boundary).

This is a theorem, it is not so by definition. Just try to integrate a derivative manually (write down the definition of a derivative) and you will see that everything cancels out except for the function's values at endpoints. Ask again if unclear. This can be easily understood on an intuitive level and will help you understand the Gauss theorem, the Stokes theorem (3-dimensional), the Greene theorem, etc.

Literally manually integrate a derivative by the definition of an integral and the definition of a derivative.

>>10336303
To clarify my answer:
1. Don't think of it as a pair antiderivative-function but rather function-derivative.
2. Write out explicitly the integral as f'(a)+f'(a+dx)+f'(a+2dx)+...+f'(a+[n-1]dx)+f'(b)
3. Write out explicitly the derivatives as f(a+dx)-f(a)+f(a+2dx)-f(a+dx)+...
4. Cancel out similar terms except for f(b)-f(a) since they don't have a pair

This can be easily found in any textbook, wiki article, blog post, etc. Most of the "issues" itt are about a too low of a low skill of finding and comprehending information in general.

>>10336186
/thread

>>10336303
>>10336353
That actually makes sense now, thanks dude!

Any dimension beyond 4

>>10336162
Electricity. Voltage, current, power etc.

I don't understand group actions.

>>10336196
Does it have something to do with casusing the electrons to spin/move in unison?

>>10336162
Long division.

i find permutations and combinations extremely difficult to grasp and that's highschool level stuff

>>10336257
It's just making the "as x approaches c, f(x) approaches L" definition numerically precise.

The idea is to force f(x) to always be within any arbitrarily chosen distance (epsilon) from the limit. We construct a function (delta) of epsilon that tells you how close x has to be to c for f(x) to always be within epsilon distance of L. This gives you a constructive of making f(x) as approximately equal to L as you want.

if I should keep working hard and getting good scores or just give up

>>10336470
$R^3$ is our three dimensional space
$R^4$ is a set of three dimensional spaces (some people can call this time if you go from $s_i$ to $s_n
$R^5$ is the set of sets of three dimensional spaces (I guess you could imagine this as a set of strings of time)

At least thats my understanding

>>10336162
how to get gf

>>10336634
and you probably shouldnt listen to me because im a retard who doesn't know how to tex

>>10336162
how scientists KNOW (beyond a shadow of a doubt) what weather was like 500,000+ years ago

>>10336162
collisons and linear algebra.
cheers

>>10336643
climate, little grasshopper, climate

climate =/= weather

>>10336258
yeah me too. and also how are different species created if not with a very small gentic diversity
hope it helps.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction#Origin_of_sexual_reproduction

>>10336669
well i do understand that, but i dont understand studies that state a degree change globally for that far back into the past
im not denying climate change in any way, i just dont really get how they are able to get that information in a way they feel is accurate

Circuits. Can do basic kvl and kcl but as soon as you add branches I just cannot do it.

>>10336676
they base that in the fosils' characteristics from the era (they know studying the carbon 14 atoms) and the charateristics of the ice layers of antartica (co2 concentration included)

>>10336688
but i have no idea how the carbon 14 thing works thoug, cant understand it

>>10336162
Electrochemistry. Voltaic cell calculations are what get me worst, but I kinda get it down conceptually. Also, everything about circuits.

>>10336162
I have had inertia explained in every class and I still dont get it
Am I a brainlet?

>>10336627
You can always give up in the future, but you can't get back in time to work harder.

>>10336467
Sure mate.

>>10336505
The easiest is probably Sn, the permutation group. Do you understand what are the elements of, say, S3? Assuming you do, to consider the group action of S3 you need a set. For instance, one can define the group action of S3 on the 3-dimensional Euclidean space (which you know from school): a group element g just permutes the coordinates. For instance, an element (1->2, 3->3) of the group S3 acts on a 3-dimensional vector (1,5,26) and gives us back a vector (5,1,26).
There are more complex groups and you can act on more complex sets/spaces, but this is the general idea: group elements are no longer abstract and instead become maps from our set X to itself: g(x)=y. So every element g of some group G can now eat an element of a set X and give back another element of set X.

>>10336722
Consider watching experiments on youtube or doing one yourself.

>>10336722
An object can't spontaneously "decide" to change it's velocity. It must be acted upon by an external force. It's just a concept, not something you can measure. That's pretty much it.

>>10337025
>An object can't spontaneously "decide" to change it's velocity
i do everyday :^)

dew point

I can't figure out how the hell to read a Mass spec data sheet.

Cryptocurrency

>>10336222
I have this specific problem with Stoke's/Green's. I get why integrals would word that way (since you've already 'summed' the equation via the integration and to any endpoints take on accumulated values), but I don't get how you can rule out curl doing crazy shit that results in spin that doens't 'cancel out' while still having a boundary with no curl when integrated.

>>10336257
>I don't get how you just pick random values for it and it proves anything

The point is that you show you can pick *any* value, and hence all values no matter how small, and it will work for those. Just picking random values and them happening to work wouldn't show anything.

I don't understand how you can have a single atom. Because it's all quantum fuzzy right? So how can you say "here is a single atom of X". I heard somewhere that if you go below a certain concentration, it's as if there are no atoms, which is why homeopathy is not great.

BUT HOW CAN YOU HAVE ONE ATOM??? Because of quantum BS one atom should just kind of dissipate right? I think the uncertainty principle is involved somehow in this too. You see these images of people doing strange things to get images of a single atom, but the principle says you can't do that so what's going on!?

>>10336207
What do you mean?

>>10336639
>>10336634
That makes more sense, I read that each dimension is orthogonal to the lower dimension, but can't wrap my head around how it's not redundant. Visualizing them as sets makes sense but I don't know if I'm misunderstanding.

>>10336241
Low test

>>10336260
its more of a language riddle then anything maths anyways

>>10337277
there is not a fourth spatial dimension, so IMO you're grasping at straws. people with "4d visualization skills" are just more used to the math

>>10337264
>I think the uncertainty principle is involved somehow
I'm not certain

>>10336162
Why when you flip a fair coin an infinite number of times, there isnt a sequence of infinite heads followed by infinite tails at some point, and vice versa. Basically why the larger infinite set (if that's the right term) of coin flips doesnt include "smaller" infinite sets.

any physics problem involving pulleys
fuck pulleys

>>10336162
i did not understand how the fuck force was a vector until i had to study for the mcat.

>how the fuck is gravity -9.8 when i can arm pump with no resistance
>how the fuck can u calculate the distance a ball moves given initial trajectory and speed
>moon landing was a lie

>>10337311
because those are set values yes they may seem to go for infinitely then flip but if someone counts that is a value of flips

Waves. Hopefully I'll get a better grasp as time goes on (because I have to), but "solving the equation of motion" makes zero sense to me.

>>10337356
By "waves" what I really mean what wave-like motion and simple harmonic motion. Though standing waves and shit are equally mysterious.

How does little boy work? how does it trigger nuclear fission? Where the fuck did the neutrons came from?

>>10336162
Working with fractions.
Addition and subtraction.
Reading and writing.

>>10336162
why euler's number is such a big deal and has all these applications

also why it's pronounced 'oiler' and not 'you-ler'

>>10337295
bullshit, if you think that then you are clueless

>>10336162
Emotional Intelligence

>>10337223
Same

>>10336688
>studying the carbon 14 atoms
that only gets you to 30k years into the past,
but other elements exist that reach up to billions of years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating#Modern_dating_methods

The commutator subgroup

>>10336162
i dont understand why fog isnt as hot as steam.

How quantum psychics has anything to do with free will being real.

And complete mastery of self to the transcendent of transcendents

>>10337691
It is mathematical, but the specific problem statement hugely influences the actual solution, and if you don't understand this then you don't actually understand it at all.

>>10337744
this guys second question. though as to the first i can answer, before quatum mechanics it seemed that if we obtained a good enough understanding of the laws of nature as well as accurate measurements of a given system any reaction in that system could be accuratly predicted. it follows that a human body being made of/interacting with only physical matter and energy our actions and thoughts would be 100% predetermined from even before our birth as every particle of our brains is bound to natural laws and can, in any given circumstance, only react in one naturally "legal" way. now that we know that in cases of quantum superstates two particles in identical situations can produce non-identical results we feel that we have more wiggle room, so to speak, and that our lives are not predetermined

1 what information means when discussing quantum mechanics.
2 what properties where measured to lead us to believe that certain particles have "spins" that defy normal wuclian logic
3 some days almost anything past highschool algebra if im honest

I don't understand why I am continuing to exist.
It's the simplest thing in the world, to survive when you can adequately meet your needs.
I have purpose, to create electronics, booze, and firearms.
I have a gf who is 100% loyal and adoring.
I have friends who respect and admire me.
I am a good student in college, and a good engineer at work.
I am happy and accomplished, in good health at the young age of 26.
But there is no purpose to exist because upon death, (I believe) your consciousness is destroyed.
All people will eventually be forgotten, no matter how heinous or beloved their deeds.
All history will eventually disappear.
So why bother?
I still wake every day, and live, seeking the answer.
I'm not unhappy, just still unsatisfied with an answer.

Maybe it's Zen.

If a set is open, then it would have no limit points. Wouldn't that make it equal to the closure of the set? But a set is only equal to its closure if it's closed. I'm not sure why I can't have an open set without limit points so that it is equal to its closure.

>>10337273
i just never got to fiber bundles in my undergrad math. anytime i try to figure out what they are i end up being like "wtf hairbrushes?" just doesn't make sense. t. physicsfag

>>10336186

The spin-statistics theorem. I still don't understand how spin determines fermi or bose statistics.

>>10336162
Probability. Why is it unlikely to flip heads instead of tails 10 times in a row if the system gets reset upon every coin flip? It should be 50/50 every time, but if it gets less and less likely that you flip a heads with every consecutive flip, doesnt that mean that at some point it stops being 50/50 that you'll get a tails?

>>10337750
1) you select any door
2) monty opens a goat door

should you switch?

that's it. period.
no fancy word trickery

>>10337841
Then you're a brainlet. You have to factor in whether Monty has any freedom to influence the outcome. If he does, he can stack the odds against you assuming he knows you will always switch.

>>10337854
>have to factor in whether Monty has any freedom to influence the outcome.
lol no, has no meaning at all.
it all boils down to, does he reveal a goat.
and he does. that's it.
any mind games before that are irrelevant.

I always get shit on for this when I bring it up but no one has ever really been able to explain it to me.

Is there a true stationary state? Zero momentum relative to the movement of all other universal objects. Here on Earth we have, rotation, orbit, solar orbit, galactic drift, etc all the way to the directional movement from the origin of the big bang. Could an object be rendered perfectly stationary? And if so, is it possible to that would have unpredictable properties?

>>10336260
Imagine the monty hall problem with 1 million doors.
You pick one door
He closes 999,998 doors, says the prize is behind your door or the door remaining, and asks if you would like to switch
Whilst before all of the doors had a 1 in a million chance when you close them to show the possible door the last door has a 999,998 in a million chance of being the right one.

>>10337328
If it's an in-extensible light string you just do f=ma on each body and it's easy

>>10336243
That makes no sense... ethnics can build more muscles than whites.

The idea of "infinite sets", why radians/degrees are used, and why a unit circle is used ever instead of just using triangles for trigonometry.

>>10337886
Stationary relative to what though?

>>10337886
you're always perfectly stationary in your own frame of reference, with everything else moving relative to you

>>10337877
I look forward to fleecing you of all of your money.

>>10337903
Could it be theoretically everything else?

Thought experiment:

So take a 1 foot iron ball sitting in a lab. If you suddenly neutralize all of it's momentum from the earth spinning and the earths solar orbit, it would seem from our point of view to suddenly shoot off in one direction at high speed. Could this iron ball, be halted totally, relative to EVERYTHING else?

>>10337895

But what about base momentum? The base momentum all matter we can observe has from the big bang.

>>10337912
no, there is no absolute frame of reference, see >>10337904

>>10337910
you can't even win in a mongolian goose dating image site

>>10337901

A basic property of finite number is bijection; two sets having the same number, have a bijection between them. The bijection is the key idea. Once you have that bit, you can generalize it to infinite sets, and it turns out that you can make meaningful comparisons between them. This is why "different sizes of infinity" are spoken of.

Degrees originated in the very, very ancient world, most likely Babylonia (they had a thing for 60 and multiples thereof), and it's a nice system that humans can get their head around. Better yet, 360 is a highly composite number which is divisible by every number under 13, excepting only 7 and 11. Still, the notion of a radian is a more intrinsic and properly mathematical one: imagine the radius is a piece of "flexible" but "non-stretchable" line, like a fishing line, say. Wrap that length around the circumference. The angle of the arc so described is one radian (though this "unit" is usually suppressed and not considered to be one, like an inch or a second). This is nice by itself, but the actual application is in elementary calculus:all those neat, clean-cut rules for the derivatives and anti-derivatives of elementary functions, especially trig functions, depend on the choice of radian as the "unit" of angle measurement. The fact that the simple, mathematical, non-arbitrary (unlike degrees) notion of a radian itself leads to nice results with the elementary functions, gives us a big clue that radians are the appropriate canonical entity when speaking of angles. Radians are "from the book".

Not sure exactly what you mean with the latter complaint, but all of beginner's trig reduces to the two interesting right triangles: the 30-60-90 triangle, and the right isosceles triangle. The unit circle is simply a convenient organization of their various signed quadrant iterations, which a student can apply by rote if he wants to do it wrong (education does this wrong all the time).

>>10337912
Even if you do go perfectly stationary it just means you'll be at absolute zero, because someone going past you will see you moving.
Velocity really doesn't mean much.
What your talking about is change in momentum which would require acceleration, which has an effect on the body. However, the final velocity doesn't really mean anything

>>10337915
I can accept there is no absolute frame of reference, but why not? Is there any technical physics reason that all relative frames of reference couldn't be accounted for and controlled "neutralized"?

I'm sure you understand, this is all thought experiment, I am in no way claiming "hurr do it in a lab at MIT" accounting for all relative frames of reference is impossible from an engineering standing point.

>>10337854
>whether Monty has any freedom to influence the outcome
he doesnt

>>10336162
The difference between forecasting and just modeling the data.

Like heck, I have the data and I model it, why do I need forecasting tools? Can't I just infer future values from given data? shit's weird

>>10337926
Everything we have ever observed has had velocity, or maybe the right term would be momentum?

I suppose i'm trying to get a look at the idea that maybe our current understanding of particle physics and cosmology are based on the assumption of matter having velocity, and since we've never observed something without it, could it be possible it would behavior different in any way?

Contour integration and residues still seem like magic to me. Is there any way to intuitively understand this?

>>10337932
Again velocity really doesn't matter, there's no reason it would have any effect. Do you feel different when you're in a moving car or in a stationary one?

And all of the velocities we calculate in Cosmology are done relative to us, which doesn't matter because the expansion of the Universe is the same where ever you look and where ever you stand.

>>10337928
you're still assuming there's a background compared to which you can account for relative motion, this is not the case, spacetime itself is warped by whatever is in it

>>10337929
That depends on the specific problem statement, hence the previous comment >>10337295

Most statements of it, including the original paper, have some level of ambiguity in them that makes it dishonest to reduce it to the 1 in 3 chance.

>>10336162
I absolutely can't grasp my mind around the idea of gravity distorting timespace fabric. There are plenty of representations like pic related but surely timespace isn't a plane, it's in 3d all around, my brain starts shitting itself when I try to imagine it.

>>10337933
Learn about differential forms and cohomology, and also some topology (winding numbers).

>>10337948
Let me try to explain another way.

I'm comfortable with relativity. Observer watching a ball thrown in a car, versus being in the car. The balls motion is seen differently, easy. Everything is moving relative to everything else.

So, if we are presented with a singular object that is motionless from every other possible frame of reference, including it's own, is that object stationary? And does being stationary from all possible references imply anything about it?

Maybe not, maybe I'm thinking about something that isn't really a thing, but I'm still curious about the possibility of a totally stationary object.

>>10337969
If you're talking about something with no kinetic energy that's just an object at absolute zero.

>>10337952
Would wake momentum from the big bang not be the base line for movement all matter is under the influence of?

>>10336505
For any element in the group you have a transformation of the objects. For example the circle group S^1 acts on the plane by rotations.

>>10337805
>If a set is open, then it would have no limit points.
No, open sets can contain limit points.

>>10337969
That object would still have momentum relative to any other point of reference in the universe, and from that stationary object point of reference everything would have momentum. I really doesn't get you anywhere.

>>10336162
how a negative number times a negative number is positive

>>10337975
big bang happened everywhere at once, everything is moving away from us because of it, you wouldn't be wrong to consider the place you are right now the exact center of the universe, and we're back to my first statement that your own reference frame is stationary

>>10336162
how to get a gf

>>10337961
It's important when you get into high level physics to know that all that we're learning about are different models and rules we can use to describe what's going on. It is never really the case that our model is 1:1 with reality.

The only space time warp we can actually visualise is in 1 dimension, because we need another to show time and another to show it bending.

So lets say that some particle with a big mass curves this space time in to a cone with said particle being at the vertex of the cone.

If were to "unfold" the cone into a 2d plane and then draw a straight line for some other test particle (to show it isn't moving, at the same point in space for all of the time co-ordinates), and then "fold" it up again the line will curve towards the vertex and therefore will move towards whatever is causing the warp.

Showing space time with the Sun and Earth where no axis is showing time really confuses people to what GR is actually about.

>>10337982
Ok, it's starting to sink in for me I think.

What I've been thinking about is an illusion of the concept of what motion is.

There is no stationary-ness, as all objects are in relative motion to each other. And even if you magically remove all velocity from an object, it is still set in motion because all other frame points, including itself, are in motion relative to each other?

It's hard to divorce myself from the impulse to give singular momentum special meaning. And objects motion is not inherently important.

>>10337983
Positive fractions may be thought of as scalings of some objects (with respect to the center of mass let's say). Multiplication corresponds to composition of scalings. A negative number is a scaling and a reflection through the center. So what happens when you do a reflection twice ? It cancels out.

>>10337983
- sign changes direction
2 changes of direction has no effect

>>10337985
Thank you. It's sinking in. I'm honestly being my head around this.

It's not the same as grasping a new concept. I feel more like I'm breaking a held assumption. Mentally it feels different than just learning new information. So i'm making myself open to truly changing my mind about it.

>>10337991
>And even if you magically remove all velocity from an object, it is still set in motion because all other frame points, including itself, are in motion relative to each other?

You summed it up perfectly.

>>10337959
if it's not like >>10337841
it's not the monty problem

>but original paper
nobody cares what the history was.
today the monty "problem" is perfectlty described in >>10337841
and anything else is brainlet faggotry

>>10337959
if it's not like >>10337841
it's not the monty problem

>waaaah but original paper
nobody cares what the history was.
today the monty "problem" is perfectly described in >>10337841
and anything else is brainlet faggotry

>>10338004
In a weird way, I almost feel like I somehow understood general relatively first, and classical physics second, so that my personal assumptions were sort of flipped around.

It's been an interesting night.

>>10336191
Same and also programming like.. how are you getting a logic gate that can just tell if it's a 0 or 1 do all this cool stuff?
Would be great if someone explained

>>10337889
It's still 50/50 dude? The chance of the door you picked goes up when the other doors are closed

Motor windings, shit just seems like wizardry

>>10338024
level 0:
and-gate, or-gate, inverter
level-1:
SR latch
level-2:
D latch

learn those, and you're 99% done

>>10337980
I reread the definition and finally understood it now. I thought it said that all points in a closed set are limit points, not that all limit points are inside the set.

>>10338024

>>10338116

Basically most of electronagnetism

Math of any kind above algebra. I can grasp most concepts pretty quickly even if they are explained in the most unnecessarily verbose way possible, but as soon as numbers are involved, my brain just can't work with them.

I've always had a near perfect score in every science class I've took, but I can never seem to get above average at mathematics.

wtf is radians

>>10336162
i am a ok-good with analysis and linear algebra and other major math fields, but complete brainlet at probability theory./statistics i don't even get random variables, much less anything more complicated. i can learn the stuff through rote-learning but i have no intiution/understanding regardless

>>10337961
Consider the distortion this way: near a large mass, gravity squeezes space and stretches time. That means that the closer you are to something heavy like the Earth, there's "more space" to cross in the same distance, and it takes a longer time to do so.

So imagine now that you're flying through space with Earth to your left. The left part of you will feel this squeezing of space and stretching of time more than your right part. That means you'll be lagging on the left with regards to your right. This causes you to turn to the left, towards the planet. And that's what you experience as the gravitational force.

periodic decimals

>>10337974
Even objects at absolute zero have kinetic energy. Helium stays liquid at absolute zero because zero-point energy is enough to keep it from freezing.

LCM and HCF

>>10336490
>>10336490
Voltage is just a differing charge distribution. You can imagine the two ends of a battery having different numbers of electrons which will try to even out when you create a path with a conductor/wire. The units of voltage are Joules/Coulomb or how much energy per unit of charge (a ball loses more potential energy on a steeper hill which is why two electrons can do different amounts of work depending on how steep the hill is). This “evening out” or flow of electrons is current. Current is measured in charges/second, in other words the amount of electrons passing a cross section of wire per second

Electricity is basically just a voltage causing charges to flow (current)

Power is P=IV, the units being charges/second * joules/coulomb = joules / second. In other words energy/second which is different from charges/second because current says nothing about the amount of energy being done.. only the amount of charges moving through a cross section per second. While power tells you how much energy is being “dissipated”, or lost (because current flows from a higher charge distribution to a lower charge distribution so energy is being lost during that journey which can be represented in the form of power). Power tells you how much energy is being lost at a cross section. This energy is lost in the form of heat.

>>10336490
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4jzgqZu-4s

>>10337744
>QM means free will is real
It doesn’t

>>10337854
What? That has nothing to do with it brainlet

It’s literally just the fact that there are two doors left and he inherently opens one that definitely didn’t have a car behind it with increased odds because you only had a 1/3rd chance of getting the right door now there’s a 2/3rd chance of a car being behind the other doors still and he opened one of them making the other door a 2/3rd chance and your door a 1/3rd chance

It’s so easy to understand, I don’t get how people don’t get it

>>10338562
>It’s so easy to understand

You should be able to understand why Monty being able to have potentially denied the choice (even if he didn't in your specific case) should affect things then. If you can't then that says enough about yourself.

>>10338576
The only way his choice matters is if he chooses the car, in which case you already know you lost

Any goat he chooses will give you the same result

>>10338582
>in which case you already know you lost

Yes, but the possibility of him choosing the car changes how the probabilities distribute. If he actually randomly chooses which unopened door to open, as opposed to deliberately selecting a goat, and it just so happens in your case that in your case he chose a goat, then the probabilities distribute differently. In that specific case in fact, they give you even 50:50 chances to pick the car or goat instead of 2/3 to the car. I believe that you are smart enough to work out why.

>>10338644
But that's not the Monty Hall problem. The problem is specifically about the case where he consciously eliminates one goat before you're allowed to switch.

>>10336200
Energy supplied to each coulomb of passing charge

>>10337809
A topological space that locally looks like a product space, but not globally

>>10336637
bumble

fucking transistors

>>10337732
When you form the quotient of a group by its commutator subgroup, you're basically just defining elements aba^-1b^-1 in the group to be the identity e. Hence, you get that ab=ba in the quotient group for all elements, so you must have an abelian group.

>>10337854

Complete and utter bullshit. You should get checked for mental retardation.

The only case in which Monty has any freedom is when both of the doors that you didn't choose have a goat in them, and in that case he'll just choose whether you're gonna switch to one wrong door on another, which has absolutely no effect.

Monty therefore does not get to make any meaningful choice, and 2/3 of the times they don't get to make any choice at all.

>>10337901
>definition: Two triangles ABC, A'B'C' are similar if the ratios AB:A'B', BC:B'C', AC:A'C' are all equal.
>theorem: any two similar triangles have the same corresponding angles
>definition: sin, cos and tan are the ratios of sides (you know which) of a right-angled triangle
>theorem: by previous theorem, the latter is well-defined up to similarity
>theorem: every right angled triangle is similar to a right angled triangle with hypotenuse of length 1
>theorem (pythagoras): every right angled triangle has c^2=a^2+b^2 where c is the hypotenuse
>construction: fix a point O and a line L through O, and consider all right-angled triangles of hypotenuse 1 whose non-right-angle vertex is O, and its non-hypotenuse side is on L
>theorem: the vertex of the hypotenuse that is not O defines a circle (minus 4 "degenerate" points) as the hypotenuse varies its angle through L

>>10338861
It's like a relay except really small and fast

gravitational slingshots
seriously can't wrap my head around that shit

kinetics

It is a mystery how humans recognize the two different orientations.

>>10338862
Oh I see, that's why G mod the commutator of G is abelian. so the size of the commutator is like a measure of "how nonabelian" a group is, for if it's an abelian group the commutator is trivial

pretty much any type of genetic laboratory techniques, like PCR, blotting. ELISA. flow cytometry...shit makes zero sense to me

>>10336162
i dont understand lancan
but this is good

>>10339581
precisely

>>10336162
How does a bose einstein condensate state of matter induce a supernova like explosion when its magnetic state is suddenly switched if it, being only three billionths of a degree from absolute zero, does not possess the energy to explode?

Measure theory. Parts I get, other parts are wtf

>>10338901
Easiest thing I can relate it to is air around a wing creating lift because it has to speed up to keep up with the air on the other side of the wing.

>>10336196
it doesn't cause voltage, it drives charged particles around

if charged particles pile up somewhere you get voltage

>>10336162
where the exponents come from in differential equations lol

>>10338901
it's broadly analogous to physically bouncing a ball off a truck, except the "collision" is not mediated by direct contact but rather by gravitational acceleration

you steal momentum from the planet by having it drag you along while you're close to it

>>10339636
How much of it do you get?

>>10339635
Flipping the magnetic state requires energy.

>>10339685
It's insufficient for a scale model supernova to occur though, and yet it does.

>>10339685
It's the collapse into itself that flips it, but then it disappeares out of view of our electron microscopes completely (about half the atoms), and then they all re-emerge exploding.

>>10339696
>>10339691
Ignore these I forgot the purpose of this thread. Thanks for answer.

>>10336162
Spin and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
>>10336191
fucking brainlet

>>10339681
Went through Babby Rudin. Never quite understood the interchangeability of integral and derivative in this setting.

>>10337311
By definition an infinite sequence has no end, nothing comes after it. So how could one come after another? Ignoring any probability stuff, there could be a sequence like (T,H,H,H,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,...) which ends an infinite unbroken sequence of tails, but in that case there couldn't be any Hs afterwards, by definition of infinite.

>>10339716
I'm not a brainlet if I didn't put any effort into learning it at all. Didn't do a single exercise in the books. Just this last month is really when my discipline has increased exponentially

>>10336162
Fourier transform, I just can't fucking wrap my head around it

>>10339800
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spUNpyF58BY

Vison excitation.

>>10337901
>infinite sets
You're not having a problem understanding. Infinite sets are not closed and therefore cannot be contained in a collection.
Sets are vaguely defined, leading to illogical results like "infinite sets". This is why set theory is trash.
t. utrafinitist

>>10339800
all u gotta know is how to do it and that the result is the function mapped in the frequency domain meaning you see which frequencies are present

Buttsecs

How do quaternions represent spatial rotations and why is it so complicated? (say, as opposed to complex numbers)

Basic arithmetics..
I can't add/multiply numbers on the fly
I passed all my Calculus I,II, II, linear algebra and differential equations with an A-

Please tell me I'm not alone..

>>10337783
I think the purpose of life is to just live life and actualize your best self every day. This is probably just some reality we opted into in some crazy DMT-like plane of existence. You'll never get an answer so just try to relish every moment because this is all we have. sorry if this came off as preachy but the same thought often occurs to me too. Try meditating too.

>>10336162
I have no idea how roots (sqrt, cube root etc) are calculated. I know that I can "take the cube root of x" and I know functionally what that means, but I have no clue how to actually perform that computation.

>>10338899
wtf is a relay

>>10340020
were you always allowed to use a calculator?
I'm slow too cuz i always relied on calculators. also my parents never made me do flash cards with basic arithmetic

>>10340126
Yes since I was a kiddo
I tried to practice but I couldn't get any faster

>>10337311
Such an infinite sequence would actually have the same cardinality ("size") as the original sequence. So the probability of it happening is the same as the original sequence being heads only.

Comparing sizes of infinities leads to weird concepts imo. For example the set of all integerers has the same cardinality ("size") as the set of all even numbers.

>>10340088
There are a couple algorithms. The easiest to understand would be the babylonian method for finding square roots:

https://blogs.sas.com/content/iml/2016/05/16/babylonian-square-roots.html

>>10336260

Monty hall problem is not a logical problem. It is similar to the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics. The problem is anti-logic if it has no "cause and effect".

Just remember that when a problem is not logical or derivable, you use probability and statistics.

The most popular example for this kind of problem is Economics. Since logic does not apply to the real world, the most effective stock market strategies uses probability and statistics.

>>10337841

if there are 100 doors and you pick one and monty shows you there's goats behind 98 of them and asks you if you want to switch. one of the few problems that you scale up instead of reduce to reveal the trick.

How to find the empirical formula from % and amu.

>>10336162
Work in physics. Equation is easy but intuitively understanding it is not. I’ve just started thinking in terms of energy instead.

>>10340214
>Monty hall problem is not a logical problem
>>>/x/

fuckin invertible matrix theorem

>>10337961
>it's in 3d

>>10340182
https://youtu.be/2Op3QLzMgSY?t=5m

https://youtu.be/csInNn6pfT4?t=6m30s

>>10337060
Dew point is the temperature at which water will condense on a surface, like when you get a cold drink out of a fridge on a hot humid day and water covers the container it was in

There Is a really simple way to get an approximation of it,

Tdp (dew point)=~ T(outside temperature)-((100-RH(Relative humidity))/5)

If you want to see something cool, buy a Peltier module off of eBay, a cheap power supply and a computer heatsink, and put the peltiers hot side on the heatsink so it stays cool, then ice will start forming on the cold side once it drops past the dew point temperature

>>10340000
https://youtu.be/zc8b2Jo7mno?t=2m30s

>>10340000
[math] \displaystyle
\boxed{ \mathbb{O} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{H} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{C} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{R} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{Q} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{Z} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{N}}}}}}}}
[/math]

>>10337264
You can say "Here is an atom" if it's observed. The reason you can't do the same with electrons is because observing them changes their position.

>>10340109
Used in lieu of an analogue switch (physically opening and closing a circuit) in situations where it is impractical. A smaller, lower voltage switch is used to control the flow of electricity.

>>10336260
At first you had a 1/3 chance of getting it right. Statistically, you probably didn't pick the right door, so you should switch.

>>10336601
Dorner?

Permutation = more unique sets because order matters

Combination = order is not taken into account

In a permutation 1,2,3 , 2,3,1 , 3,2,1 are counted as unique sets, where as in a combination they are counted as the same set.

>>10340000
nice digits.

the simple answer is that the imaginary components of a quaternion specify the axis of rotation, and the ratio of the magnitude of the imaginary component to the magnitude of the real component specifies the angle.

>>10338770
>But that's not the Monty Hall problem.

Fuck this idea. The only reason 'The Monty Hall Problem' has the canonical form it does is because so many people were unable to deal with the ambiguity in the actual problem as stated, so it ended up being reduced to this simple, static form instead of the rich, open ended problem it is. It's basically a bunch of frequentists being unable to deal with practical details and implicit possibilities, and hence simplifying them away so they can act like they've solved it.

>>10340599
go back to >>>/x/
sci is for adults

How to learn something efficiently. I seem to do this naturally when I have an interest in the subject, but when I don't, I'm completely lost.
I guess this has to do with my hyperfocus.

chicken or the egg?

>>10340614
Egg

>>10336162
Why was I born a sub-150 IQ brainlet? I just wanna be genius dammit.

>>10337223
>>10337709
It's a list of transactions. Each new block of transactions has a hash of the previous block, which makes a chain going back to when the currency was created. If you wanted to change an item in the list, every hash after it would be different.

When people want to make a transaction, they broadcast that desire to miners. Miners check to make sure they aren't spending coins they don't have. The miners also have to do a proof-of-work. They find a special value to include when they generate the next hash that will give the hash a certain amount of leading zeros. The difficulty changes to make sure coins are issued at a steady pace.

Finding the special values takes a lot of computing power, so nobody can start a fake bitcoin blockchain and catch up to the original one unless they have more computing power than everyone else.

To incent Miners to contribute their computing power, the miners are rewarded with new coins when find the special value and add a block.

That's what I recall, but you can always read Nakamotos paper and the government (I think NSA) paper he cites on how digital coins worked before.

>>10340625
so an almost chicken had a mutation that laid a chicken egg. How did that chicken reproduce?

>>10338861
https://youtu.be/SW2Bwc17_wA?t=1m50s

>>10340666
the mutation was small enough so it could still reproduce with the almost-chickens

>>10337223
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4

>>10340674
makes sense

>>10340109
When you get to hit twice

>>10338844
Checked

>>10339651
You understand how they appear in integration?

>>10337342
Lol

>>10336162
Coding. Even simple stuff like "Hello World" puts me into rage mode.
Which is funny because I'm pretty gud in math, but I dropped out of CS because I failed programming twice.

>>10336241
Not you again...

Go to /fit/ and not to /sci/. And we went through it a dozen times, it's not possible to not gain muscle even as a low t male.

>>10339792
>he needs to do exercises to understand babby’s first analysis

>>10336162
National debt and why the system doesn't collapse after it reaches a point where it obviously can't be paid back.

>>10341232
I have already browsed /fit/ but none of their advice work. I wish somebody smart would solve my problem in a non-meme way. I hate myself and I hope I die soon

>>10341231
bait

>>10337743
Steam is water in gas state. It can only exist over 100 C (normal pressure). Fog is water condensate, meaning it was steam in air, but when getting colder, it became water. But it is still in small water drips, so it "floats" in air for a wile.

Time dilation
If a spaceship is moving at near lightspeed, to a person inside it looks like time outside is going faster. But since there's only frames of reference, shouldn't an observer outside the ship see time going faster inside?

>>10336162
When I count from 1 to 10 I get 10 numbers, but When I subtract 1 from 10 I get 9, why?

>>10338054
Lolwut

>>10338505
Forget decimals, they are retarded

>>10341273
Because there are 10 numbers between 1 and 10, including 1, and there are 9 numbers between 1 and 10, excluding 1.

>>10341255
This

>>10341273
if you are subtracting 1 from 10 then you get 9 because 9 comes right before 10
if you are counting down from 10, you need to include 10 in your count
im not sure if the poor wording in your question is accidental or part of the bait

>>10337961
Gravity doesn't distort space time fabric. Gravity IS dstorted spacetime fabric caused by the presence of energy momentum. It is a property of spacetime not something that dwells in spacetime. But we identify it classically as a force because it leads to objects moving a certain way than they would if spacetime was flat. The real question how can space itself be malleable in response to things that "live" in it

>>10336162
Somebody please explain to me the hodge operator of differential forms. What is a hodge dual of a p-form in n-dim space and how can I visualize it's relationship with the p-form?

>>10341334
I've never actually worked with that, but I think it just transforms a p-form into an n-p form in the "most symmetric way". This means for example that it's idempotent (up to sign) and it takes orthonormal basis to orthonormal basis. Hodge star of 1 is the volume form. I think that if a 1-form is a vector field X with lowered index, then Hodge star of this form is contraction of the volume form by X. But I'm not sure. I don't know what you mean by visualization.. I mean, can you "visualize" a general p-form?

>>10338054
It doesn't tell you any new information about the door you picked, (you already knew that the prize could have been behind one of the doors you didn't pick) so the probability for that door hasn't changed from the initial setup. Considered together, the probability for the doors you didn't pick hasn't changed either, but the DISTRIBUTION of probability has. The probability of winning for non-chosen doors has been narrowed to one specific door with the additional information given.

>>10341356
I mean, can you "visualize" a general p-form?
I can, by visualizing the basis covectors dx and dy as oriented stacks. Then, the bases of higher forms would be wedge products of the bases 1 forms i.e. oriented grids, volumes, hypervolumes and so on. So a p-form can be visualized as a weighted sum of those bases p-forms. Same as you visualize a vector as a weighted sum of basis vectors of magnitude 1 oriented along your coordinates

>>10340647
You've lost me by the second sentence.

>>10341264
>shouldn't an observer outside the ship see time going faster inside?
They do if the ship is approaching the observer. You know the classic twin paradox? The one on the spaceship sees the Earthbound twin in slow motion for half the trip, and fast motion for the return half. The Earthbound twin sees the one on the spaceship in slow motion for almost the entire duration of the trip, then a brief period of fast motion for the return. Both agree that the earthbound twin would have experienced more time passing.

How batteries work :(

>>10336186
This. I mean I have a basic understanding and have made it through vector calculus which has a bit of trig in it, but wtf is going on with trigonometry?

>>10337834
Because each trial is independent in a coin flip, you have to multiply Pr(Heads) n times, where n=10 in your example. It is 50/50 everytime, but you want the probability of 10 heads in a row if I'm reading your post right.

>>10341258
Not bait, I wish it would be bait. I passed all my math exams in the first try but failed my programming 1 exam twice.

>>10336162
Despite being shown it derived from emoirical equations and whatnot fucking Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is esoterics to me, I can't imagine it and I don't get it why it works.

>>10341257
what have you tried so far you faggot?????

>>10341231

>>10341255
Because the country in question most likely owns debt from other countries, i.e. loaned them money. Therefore it keeps everyone in check, unless you commit sodoku like Greece did. As long as a country can pay the interest everything is all good.

>>10341445
Why do you guys think this is bait, I failed my coding exam twice, got depressed and dropped out. What exactly is so unbelievable.

>>10336247
>>10336466
>>10341399
I bet we could actually understand it if we dedicate a whole week studying this shit.

>>10336162
transparent objects

>>10341257
You don't need a coach to build muscle, you need a psychiatrist to let go of your obsession to build muscle.

>>10341479
Light can only be absorbed by matter if the matter has electron orbitals between which electrons can move easily which correspond to the energy content of particular wavelengths of light. If none such orbitals are available (and there isn't a conductive sea of electrons as in metals that reflects light), there is nothing to absorb the energy of the light. Material boundaries can cause optical effects like refraction even if they don't absorb the light, so transparency also requires a homogeneous structure that doesn't scatter the light either.

>>10341526
I understand as much, but a ray of light has to somehow interact with the atoms, otherwise the fact that light travels at a lower velocity than in a vacuum (less than 1/3 c for some solids) would break one of the fundamental laws of physics.
It was explained to me that the photon causes the electrons to oscillate between their energy states (always the same energy states, or the wavelength would change) and that oscillation is passed to the next atom.
I just don't get that light travels in a straight line inside of an objects, even materials like water or glass, where the molecules are arranged randomly.

>>10336162
Never understood resistance while studying electric shit in high school.

Never understood how 100v + 100v could make 200v instead of 100v.

How can you add up voltage, this makes no sense.

>>10339640
Because that's wrong
http://www3.eng.cam.ac.uk/outreach/Project-resources/Wind-turbine/howwingswork.pdf

>>10340483
The real numbers do not exist.

>>10336186
>>10336247
>>10336466
>>10341399
Truly I am home; I have found my people.

>>10339643
Ohhh right no shit so it's like, charged particles are being disturbed from a state of lower potential energy to a state of higher potential energy. Like if you have a mixture of positive and negative charges evenly spread out and then you decide to mix it with a spoon and that even dispersion of positive and negative charges gets messed up and some positive charges get too close to each other and ditto for negative charges and this creates voltage because the electrostatic interactions between them will try to push them back into a state of lower potential energy (i.e: the nice and even dispersion in the soup of charges)

>>10337264
I'm working my way through a book on Quantum Mechanics so I feel pretty qualified to answer this.
>Because of quantum BS one atom should just kind of dissipate right?
Nah mate I've never heard of anything like this. The principal states that you can't know position AND velocity of the atom AT THE SAME TIME. Take a photo of a flying bullet and you know its position, but not its velocity. Take a time lapse photo and you know its velocity but not its position. Make sense now?

Communication with Humans

>>10341587
no u

>>10341257
>what is mass

Your body is a machine that runs on food. When all you do is nerd shit all day and eat like a humming bird of course your body will reflect that lifestyle. So start eating at a 600 calorie surplus a day, and do a proven to work lifting routine like starting strength. But don't do it for a month and then say "NoThiNG WOrks!". Do it for 3 months and you will see changes thats a guarantee.

>>10336162
Programming. I'm good at the theory behind computer science but I hate writing code. It's the most tedious thing I can think of. I can't wait to be able to hire Indian people for 2 pounds an hour to make my shit.

>>10337900
absolutely false, look at the top 100 hundred strong men

>>10336235

Beat me to it

Percentage math.
Don't know if I just can grasp the concept or it was because I missed a year's worth of math by going to a public school during 7th grade.

It's annoying anyway.

>>10336251
Define "white"

>>10341879
everywhere you see ' % '
replace it with
[math] \times \dfrac{1}{100} [/math]

exact same thing

>>10341891
How do you set that up if we're trying to find, say 35% of 90?
Or if you know 120 is 7% of the total number and need to find the total number?

>>10336186
Wtf do you not understand about trig?

>>10341908
The easiest way I do it is cross multiplication. SO we place what ever percentage over 100 and if dont know it we put a X. We then place the number which is the percentage over the number we are basing as 100%. So in your example we could find 35% of 90 by doing 35/100 is equal to x/90 and then cross multiply and solve for X. In the second example just place 7/100 and 120/x.

>>10336162
What is a manifold?

>>10341915
Everything. All I know to do is how to compute sine, cosine, etc.

>>10341986
like what dont u get about it

its just ratios. sin(x) is literally equal to opposite/hypotenuse, as in the the operation of doing sin is literally that ratio

what dont u get about it

>>10341908
if you have 1/3rd of a cake you have .33 of 1 cake, or 33% out of 100% of it. or you can think of percents like you are scaling it up so you have 33 cakes left out of 100

if you have .35 of 90 then .35*90 = whatever the calculator says

so if 120 is 7% of the total number then you know you have .07 (7/100) of the total number. so you have an UNKWOWN number X and multiplying it by .07 gets you 120. so .07X=120. divide both sides by .07.. 120/.07 = whatever the calculator says

>>10342009
>sin(x) is literally equal to opposite/hypotenuse, as in the the operation of doing sin is literally that ratio
See, I didn't know that. I've had a very poor math education in my life.

>>10342046
ah well trig is just ratios like that and fucking with them to get other ratios

>>10342059
Well, that's good news, then. I'll have an easier time when I decide it's time to learn it properly.

I don't get gravitation.
I mean, any object has gravitation based on it's mass. Gravitation attracts other objects, so it's a kind of energy.
Where does that energy come from?
I know that it kinda bends space, creating a gravity well that other objects "fall" into. But how is that well created and where does the energy come from not only to create that well but to maintain it?
This energy seems to be inherent in any mass, and it doesn't get lost when it has attracted another object, it only get's bigger.

>>10342358
Scientists didnt figured that out either, anon.
Fuck, even after the creation of that gravity detector in US, we still are unable to know if gravitons exists or not since we dont have a light source to compare with the gravity wave and see if arrives at the same speed or a bit behind.

>>10341587
Based

>>10342398
Too bad...
Thank you for the answer anyway.

>>10336634
Wrong:
We can easily prove that there exists no surjection between Any set E to the sets of E ( for convenience let's denote it P(E) )
Therefore there can be no bijection between R^3 and P(R^3), which , supposing your logic is correct ,is R^4
however we can also prove that there exists a bijection between R^4 and R^3
So your reasoning leads to a contradiction
Inherently , P(R^3) and R^4 are very very different , so different that they don't even have the same cardinality

>>10342628
thanks for the correction

>>10340984
nope

>>10336162
why quantum mechanics is best phrased within Hilbert-space terms

>>10341255
Because paying it back doesn't really matter, only that the interest is paid... Forever

Why do pressures and temperatures equalize faster when the delta is higher?

>>10336505
you jump between elements of the set based on what the group does

>>10341908
>35% of 9

35 x 1/100 x 9

>>10341908
>120 is 7% of the total number

7 x 1/100 x total = 120

0!=1
Recursion

>>10336683
This, complex circuits are rough.

What is a trade agreement, and why are they necessary? Why can't private companies simply accept orders from overseas customers, and deliver them? How exactly are the governments involving themselves?

>>10341383
There is no such thing as a bitcoin. There exists only a spreadsheet saying how many bitcoins have moved between each address. This is a ledger.
If the ledger were centralized, the owner of the ledger would be able to tamper with it, and change the values of peoples' wallets at will. Therefore, we need a decentralized ledger. Each set of transactions is a "block". This block contains yep yjinhd: yhr jsdj gimvyopn pg yjr ;sdy nlobk )s lpmf pg berification code, and te block ś own set of tarnsciotns.

>>10336162
Interacting with a stranger for more than a minute.
help

>>10336162
probability

>>10336162
Limits. I'm a fucking cuck.

>>10336186
circle with radius 1 on the Cartesian plane. Take an angle θ. Draw a line down (or up) until it hits y=0. That's cosθ. Draw a line across until it hits x=0. That's sinθ. Everything else can be derived from that.

How to properly gauge a meat's level of being cooked by pressing it

>>10336643
Plant fossils, animal fossils, bubbles in ice.

>>10341908
>120 is 7% of the total number and need to find the total number?
120 / 7 = 1%

>>10341418
Everything. Mostly SS and eating a lot

>>10341490
I'm not obsessed, I am distressed that I can't build muscle. You would be too if you *couldn't* at all build muscle. I wasn't expecting much but at least be able to build muscle.

>>10341808
I did exactly that for years and didn't notice any change

>>10341888
Not a kike, not a sandnigger, not a nigger, born in a western european country from non-refugees in a traditionally western european family which isn't dumb enough to race mix

>>10336162
Rain. I don't understand massive phase transitions from a thermodynamics perspective. It seems like you should have constant drizzles, not off/on rain.

>>10341450
This.
Just like with mortgages. Nobody (banks included) cares about paying back the principal. It's about the monthly payments.

>>10344080
>born in a western european country from non-refugees in a traditionally western european family which isn't dumb enough to race mix
This doesn't exist. EVERY human on Earth is a mutt.

>>10344078

>>10336470
>Any dimension beyond 3
ftfy

>>10343484
Ohhhhhfuuuuuuu issshappenin

>>10336691
Living things absorb many things. One of those things is a carbon isotope, C14. This C14 breaks down at a known rate. Once you die you stop absorbing C14. Measuring how much C14 is left after X years allows you to calculate that X.
Only works up to about 40,000 years.

>>10344106
Yes....... what's your point?

>>10336162
wheels.

>>10342358
Wach "vsauce- which way is down?". That video explains our current understanding of concept.

>>10341456
Okey, I will take the bait. Coding is the same concept as using formulas in math or physics. You need two things - same logical thinking as in math, and memory to remember expresions. Saying you are "pretty gud in math", but bad at coding is the same as saying "I'm pretty good writer, but I'm also analphabet".

>>10341367
Nicely explained. Very good. Exelent.

>>10341367
Stealing this for future use

>>10344233
>>10344257

when do you add or multiply probabilities

>>10344586
https://youtu.be/gCAxGTt7nLg?t=8m