[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 29 KB, 822x304, fuk.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14985889 No.14985889 [Reply] [Original]

Why can't we solve equations such as picrelated?

>> No.14985894

>>14985889
I have solved that

>> No.14985899

>>14985889
Solving it numerically is enough.

>> No.14985901

Well then be the first one faggot

>> No.14985945

>>14985889
>I cannot do the quadrature of the circle so math is incomplete

>> No.14985961

>>14985889
we can't solve your pic as much we can't solve arcsin(x)=0.3
Essentially, you can create a new function that by definition solves your equation, but that doesn't really mean there's now a closed form expression, only that you can numerically approximate any value, which is exactly what would be done for both equations' solutions.

>> No.14985973

>>14985961
How would it be any different from having the equation x^2 = 2 and then creating the square root function out of nothing, and then calling it a new function?

>> No.14986003

>>14985889
Does that formula do anything? Like is it used to calculate some physical phenomena? If it's not then I wouldn't worry about it.

>> No.14986017

>>14985973
Well the difference is that the square root is an algebraic expression, but essentially it's the exact same thing.
The only reason we can't "solve" certain equations is if you accept certain functions as closed form expressions and exclude others, which is ultimately arbitrary. So OP's question is pretty much just a matter of convention and has little to do with math.

>> No.14986063
File: 324 KB, 882x889, NJW.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14986063

>>14985889
Because solving an expressing using "transcendental" operations or these "real" numbers like taking a square root or sin require that you perform an infinite number of things. You simply cannot perform an infinite number of actions.

>> No.14986121

>>14985889
h = x = 0

>> No.14988185

>>14985973
Congrats you're correct, it is the exact same issue. You define the solution to use the "root()" function and your answer is now root(2). Which by itself is completely useless, because you cannot represent this exact value with normal integers. All you can say is that it is the solution by definition.

With Algebra, when solving for stuff, "undoing" an operation often consists of just using a function defined to be the solution to your problem and so useful values can only be derived for very specific cases.

>> No.14989212

>>14985889
There is no mathematics, only mathematic. Read Decline of the West