/sci/ - Science & Math

he was essentially rambling about the philosophical implications of Leibniz's work, while studying to apply it to economics.

>>11702360

I have a strong interest in history of math and I'd like to spend some time with Marx's thoughts on calculus at some point, a la Berkeley and the rigorous re-formulation by Weierstrass et al around the time of his death. I've also spent some time looking at an edition of MECW so those pics look like they might derive from same-fairly cramped type, but not too much to a page. Presumably the material is later on in the long "letters" section of the work, forties or so.

>>11702360
i see you are so butthurt you came over here to cope in /sci/ away from the meanies

>>11702385
based /lit/-/sci/ dual citizen

>Marx
>communism
>>//x//

>>11702472
>>>/x/

>>11702360
My Bachelor's is in mathematics and I have no fucking clue what he's trying to say here. Seems like he's trying to argue of infinitesimal analysis and is misunderstanding limits but I can't really tell. The language is so non-standard.

Damn I thought Calculus was already properly developed at the time of Marx, with rigorous definition of limits. Now I'm really happy for Weierstrass and others work in making analysis rigorous because the pic reads like crap.

ITT marxists think marx struggling with basic calculus makes him look smart

>>11702365
holy shit lamao

>>11702360
> the negation of the negation
btfo, Hegelian nonsense!

>>11702494
There was no standard language back then.
>>11702936
How many times have you independently invented non-standard analysis, brainlet?

>>11703335
Point out where he's talking about infinite products of reals quotiented out by a nonprincipal ultrafilter? I don't see it. Where is the nonstandard analysis anon? Or are you just retarded?

>>11702472
>your opinions of communism/capitalism/*insert ideology*

>>>/pol/

I'm on the verge of being a full blown communist but the idea of marx writing about dy/dx = 0/0 is fucking hilarious to me given the common criticisms of his ideas. Thankfully rightwingers are too stupid to understand any of this.

>>11703531
Communism is a lie. It has done nothing but fail and will never do anything but fail. Why are you so dumb that you’re convinced by an evil failure of an ideology?

>>11703531
>Thankfully rightwingers are too stupid to understand any of this
Marx was too stupid to grasp calculus too, apparently.

>>11702494

its obviously going to be archaic if it was written in marx's time

>>/nLab/
no but really, hegelian philosophy and marxian economics might be of high interest if it ever gets formalized

>>11702936
Those are his personal notes that the soviets decided to publish. There's really nothing too noteworthy unless you're an unironic Marx fanboy, even by Marxists standards.

It was a really funny time when philosophers, scientists, and mathematicians often crossed into each other's lanes. Kant was apparently a well regarded lecturer in natural science and wrote about astronomy.

>>11703719
Interesting how the writings of Newton and Lagrange and Euler arent fucking retarded to read then.

>>11703335
>Marx confuses evaluation with the differential
>divides by zero
>"wow, he invented non-standard analysis"

>>11703335
>How many times have you independently invented non-standard analysis, brainlet?
Cope

>>11702936

Funny to consider he couldn't do calculus, get a job or shower regularly

>>11703982
>Funny to consider he couldn't do calculus, get a job or shower regularly
He would have been griping on /sci/ about having low IQ, asking about nootropics, and failing calc 1.

>>11703982
>Funny to consider he couldn't do calculus, get a job or shower regularly
And he's still one of the greatest minds in history and most influential of our times. He gave the world the blueprints to Utopia, and the rich have been trying to save their skins ever since

>>11703990
>blueprints to utopia
He literally, literally didn't give any specifics on how a transition would work or how allocation would work at large scale levels. He provided no actual details on how any of this stuff would function practically.
Das kapital was a critique but didnt provide any way to functionally move away from it.

>>11702494
>>11702936
>>11703335
>>11703543
>>11703982
did you even read it or do you just have poor reading comprehension?
>he misapplies the word "differentiation" when it actually should be "evaluating"
>beginning with the expression y1 - y = a(x1 - x) it's useless to set x=x1 because you just end up with 0=0
>instead divide first by x1-x with x=/=x1
>we have (y1 - y)/(x1 - x) = a
>now if x approaches x1 we obtain 0/0 = a, the numerator becomes 0 and the denominator becomes 0
>this notation is useless since it bears no real information so we replace it with dy/dx
>he talks about dy/dx being a limit and criticises the idea of dx and dy being infinitesimals
apart from the 0/0 notation and his use of the word differentiation, this is just standard analysis. he uses too many words to get to the point though, so it seems a bit like incoherent schizo rambling at first.
in conclusion this is really not worth it to talk about and OP is a massive faggot for making such a /pol/ tier bait thread

sage

>>11703990
>And he's still one of the greatest minds in history

One of the worst and most evil, you mean.

> and most influential of our times

Influential in the same sense a disease is influential.

> He gave the world the blueprints to Utopia

Marx never actually gave any specifics as to how a communist society would be constructed or organized. It’s all a scam.

Reminder that communism has killed over 100,000,000 people and that capitalism has lifted hundreds of millions more out of poverty. The nations with the highest living standards are capitalist, and communism has almost disappeared from the world today because of how bad an idea it is.

>>11702936
yup basically lol

>>11703335
>independently invented non-standard analysis
Retard

>>11704222
what a cuck

>>11703990
>He gave the world the blueprints to Utopia
Should we tell him, lads?

>>11703990
>And he's still one of the greatest minds in history and most influential of our times. He gave the world the blueprints to Utopia

>>11703990
the blueprints to dystopia more like

>>11703531
>I'm on the verge of being a full blown retard

>>11702360
Descartes did it better.

>>11703990
>he gave the world the blueprints to Utopia
Im a communist. No, he did not. Please read Critique of the Gotha Program, Grundrisse, hell, even the Manifesto and The Peasents War in Germany. Marx is outright against utopianism. Any sort of critique and analysis must come from the conditions that form them. You cant plan the future, only to critique the actual and infer where a systems contradictions will lead. One of the things that makes Marx' writings so modern even centuries later is how his analysis take into account the many ways where the trends in the 19th century might not hold. Can social reforms stave eventual revolution forever? What effect has automation on the cycles of capital? What effect does the Ricardian balance have on the equilibrium prices? etc. Take that same approach to modern capitalism, but dont be a fool, taking Kapital as a Bible. You'll end up reading panaceas where there is (nor does it imply to be) none. Or you'll be no different than Fourier drawing peasant castles

>>11703864
it's pretty non-standard, all right. just wait until he starts about infinity-hats.

I understand the definition of a limit can be tricky, but the concept is really fucking easy, much easier than infinitesimal. Why do people make such a fuss about them?

I said that the increment of the athletic spectrum was called althleticism, and then this SZZA graffiti, as in athletiSZZAm appeared all over Atlanta with this shitardian turd snail. Also as in catholoSZZAm.

>>11702494
politics aside, marx is a shitty writer. just try to read his capital work and you will get a stroke. he barely gives any introduction to what he is talking about and he goes on for hours talking about different examples and scenarios just to come to a simple conclusion. his writing is very fragmented and it uses too much words for very little ideas. one should say what he believes first then explain why, not the opposite

>>11704222

"Communism" is a stupid meaningless label. Think about it.

The constitution of the United States is all about "we the people" and how all men were created equal. Communism is all about the injustice of the bourgeoisie profiting off of the proletariats. It's the same premise. Is America communism?

If you think that America is not a communist society because it is capitalist, you are aware that communists want to ultimately abolish money, government and private property. In that case, how exactly were any of the governments that killed people communist?

>>11706310
ehhh the Marx-a use-a too MUCH words! I just wanna eata pizza on my faggio bike

>>11702360

Back to /pol/, cuck

>>11704222
If you are going to ascribe those hundreds of millions of deaths to communism as a concept than it would only be intellectually honest to ascribe every death by preventable starvation or otherwise due to financial disparity of a person living in a capitalist country to capitalism as a concept, in which case the numbers are clearly not in the favor of the capitalists.

>>11707200

>Capitalist countries
>Starvation

This is your brain on communism

>>11707211
>there's no such thing as poor people lmao
Every criticism of capitalism and diehard capitalist bootlicker """logic""" makes you a red blooded communist

>>11707216

>An economic system can remove poverty
>Implying more people aren't poor under communism than capitalism

>Bootlicker
Ah yes, the commie equivalent of playing the race card when you're losing.

>>11707254
>muh spooky communism boogeyman kills a hundred gorillion oy vey
>the untold number of people that capitalism throws to the wayside or outright kills? fake news