/sci/ - Science & Math

Bump
Please save me I'm watching fucking Khan Academy trying to figure this shit out
I just want to watch anime

Bumping this until I kill every thread on this board
Also curious how to reconcile this % increase in speed versus time saved
For example a 33% increase in speed is equal to a 25% decreased time
For example, if it takes you 2.5 hours to drive home from work but they raised the speed limit by 33%, you're now at 133% your original speed which will lead to a 1.875 hour drive.
1.875 is equal to 2.5-(.25*2.5)

Is this just a coincidence or is there something more here? again brainlet

>>11605506
Another bump to be clear
Is it just a coincidence that 1/3 and 1/4 shows up in those two ways to get the same answer?

>>11605543
Bumping with retarded math questions until somebody answers the OP

So if "i" represents another dimension of mathematics, is there a way to calculate "n-dimensional" numbers?

How do you figure out the odds of winning the lottery at least "x" times out of "y" attempts if the odds are "z" if x>1 and y>x

>>11605378
Pic unrelated by the way but if anyone could decipher what he's trying to say I'll add that to the list of retarded math questions bumping the thread

>>11605378
I know it might just seem like I'm trying to overload the simulation by asking all of these stupid questions, but take your meds schizo I just want an answer to the OP
The rest are just for fun

If peripheral vision causes a perceived slowing of time, is that amount of time proportional to the reaction speed difference?

For example if your reaction time is .25 seconds, and your peripheral reaction time is .125 seconds, do you perceive time in your peripherals 50% slower?

>>11605664
Running out of retarded math questions so I'm transitioning into retard general

Please answer the OP before I completely lose my sanity

>>11605378
If schizophrenics can tickle themselves at a disproportional rate to the general public, then does that point to some disconnect in the mechanism that identifies intentionality?
FYI I can't tickle myself

Yes I can don't lie to them!

>>11605632
Alright guys I took my meds like you asked, but I still can't figure out the problem in the OP

Please send help

>>11605506
>>11605543
After taking my meds and looking at the problem in a different way I think I solved it
_____
133% |
266% |- 3x
400% |
---------
_____
100% |
200% |
300% |- 4x
400% |
---------

So in the time it would have originally taken to make 4 trips to work, you can now make in 3

The 4 is where I believe the 1/4 comes in and the 3 is where the 1/3 comes in

Phew now it's time to think of more sane questions maybe
Nah insane it is

Do people with dysmorphophobia specifically in facial features experience the phenomena of eye dilation when looking in the mirror?

>>11605506
After taking my meds and looking at the problem in a different way I think I figured this one out

---------
133% |
266% |- 3x
400% |
---------
---------
100% |
200% |-4x
300% |
400% |
---------
So in the time it would previously have taken you to get to work 4 times it now only takes 3.
This is where I believe the 1/4 and 1/3 comes into play

The benefit of being a schizo is every personality can look at the problem in a different way

>>11605506
>>11605543
After taking my meds and looking at the problem in a different way I think I figured this one out

---------
133% |
266% |- 3x
400% |
---------
---------
100% |
200% |-4x
300% |
400% |
---------
So in the time it would previously have taken you to get to work 4 times it now only takes 3.
This is where I believe the 1/4 and 1/3 comes into play

The benefit of being a schizo is every personality can look at the problem in a different way
Phew! Now time for some more retarded questions.

>>11605814
Figured out the general formula for this
>For an increased speed of 1+(1/x), you can make (x+1) trips in the time it would have previously taken you to make "x" trips

Obviously not the first retard to figure this out, but out of curiosity what kind of math is this?

If a virus in increasing exponentially while the testing capabilities are increasing linearly, would it be at all possible to confirm an exponential growth? Or would it become linear as you approach testing capacity?

If a virus is spreading exponentially while the testing capabilities are increasing linearly, would it be at all possible to confirm an exponential growth? Or would it become linear as you approach testing capacity?

Why does a coin flip have a 75% chance of coming up heads at least once after 2 attempts while almost every other n-sided object has a 2/3 chance of coming up a specific side after "n" attempts

Fucking magnets, where does the extra 9% come from?

Is it getting lonely in here or is it just me?
or is it just me?

>>11605890
What are the implications of this fact?
Do I have a higher chance of guessing a coin flip correctly at least once after two flips than I do a die after rolling 6 times?
Does this remain true as you increase to n-sided objects?
Does this difference in probability increase exponentially as you approach n=∞?

Fuck I'm running out of retarded questions

>>11605378
I think I'm starting to understand what pic related is getting at

>>11605378
I think I realized the problem with my OP
I believe you would need to factor in both the false positive and false negative rates to figure this out

>>11605378
>>11606057
So if it's 70% likely to be accurate that means the test has a 30% false-negative chance
And apparently a 10% false positive chance

Hope that helps if anyone actually knows how to solve this problem

>>11606068
Working my way through this - if you test twice and one is positive and the other is negative, does that mean there's a 70% chance you are positive?

>>11605378
>>11606068

Working my way through this - if you test twice and one is positive and the other is negative, does that mean there's a 60% chance you are positive?
Or is the % not additive, meaning there would be a .7-(.7 ⋅ .1)= 63% chance?

>>11606081
So assuming it's addative:
>X=positive result
>x=.7 ± .3

>Y= negative result
>y=.3 ± .1
____________________
Assuming it's multiplicative:
>X=positive result
>x=.7 ± (.7-(.7 ⋅ .3))
>Y=negative result
>y=.3 ± (.3-(.3 ⋅ .1))

>>11605378
>>11606081
So assuming it's addative:
>X=positive result
>x=.7 ± .3
>Y= negative result
>y=.3 ± .1
____________________
Assuming it's multiplicative:
>X=positive result
>x=.7 ± (.7-(.7 ⋅ .3))
>Y=negative result
>y=.3 ± (.3-(.3 ⋅ .1))

>>11605378
the false positive/negative ratios, combined with a small % of the population currently infected (1/237), is a classic conditional probability problem, and the results can at first be totally unintuitive

see http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/chances-are

>>11605565
google quaternion

>>11606136
i think i love you

>>11606145
Very interesting
But going with the theme of the thread which infinity is larger? The amount of possible quaternion units or the number of symbols you can make to represent them?