/sci/ - Science & Math

>Using v for frequency.

>>2622543
>dependent variable on x-axis

I have a feeling your not going to like economics.

>>2622543
Go punch everyone in Economics.

>>2622559
>implying the price isn't a function of the quantity

>giving a shit about art

spoiler: there are no rules on how you place your axes, although there ARE standards

using variables like a, b, c, d

instead of x1 x2 x3 x4 etc

>>2622543
>Implying your conventions are somehow superior to others'

>>2622571
>implying that isn't standard science

>>2622559
WTF am I looking at? The Y axis represents both price and the relative amount of supply/demand?

>>2622568

>dismissing art offhand

I just really hate it when u and v are used in the same question.

>implying there's such thing as an independent variable

All variables depend on the value of what another variable is. If a value is independent, then guess what, it's not a variable it's a constant

>>2622579

One line is supply and the other is demand.

>>2622587
Still, the y-axis is doing double-duty.

And I still can't parse it well. When quantity is low, then.... what do I read from the graph?

>>2622570
>why are you multiplying?

People who write 3x2 + 4x - 7 = 0 instead of 3x^2 + 4x - 7 = 0 or x1 + x2 + x3 + ... + xn instead of x_1 + x_2 + x_3 + ... + x_n
lrn2unambiguousnotation
Even better:
<span class="math">3x^2 + 4x - 7 = 0[/spoiler] and <span class="math">x_1 + x_2 + x_3 + ... + x_n[/spoiler]

>>2622585
Let y = f(x).
Guess what? f is dependant on a x value => y is.

>>2622598

You can also treat f(x) as the IV for all invertible functions.

>>2622606
>implying there are non-invertible functions

>>2622595

>high quantity / high price -> high supply
>high quantity / low price -> high demand
>low quantity / high price -> high demand
>low quantity / low price -> low supply

in this case, both price and demand are independent variables. Supply and demand are dependent.

>>2622612

Way to be an ass. He clearly meant functions whose inverses are also functions.

>>2622595
At low prices, demand is high while supply is low. The price adjusts so that equilibrium is reached where supply and demand are equal.

>>2622615
How does low quantity and high price PRODUCE high demand? Or does the -> mean something different?

And what's the difference between supply and quantity? I think that's my main problem. Aren't they the same thing?

> Using <span class="math">\xi[/spoiler] as a variable name.

>>2622633
>At low prices, demand is high
I don't see how that follows from the graph. The low-price line intersects both low-supply and low-demand portions of the curves.

>>2622638
There's a supplied quantity and a demanded quantity for any good.

>>2622638
Supply is a function from price to production. Given price x, production is y (because y can be produced for a profit at price x, presumably). That is the supply curve.

People with pretend knowledge. You the mother fuckers, people who spout off at the mouth with a smug look on their face because they don't know you could give a 1 hour lecture on said topic, so they try to act like they are experts just to make themselves look good when in fact they are just making themselves look so fucking stupid you don't even want to call them out on it. This is a common phenomena of people who talk too damn much.

>>2622645
One of my professors last semester called that a squiggly. Like he didn't even give a fuck what the proper name is.

>>2622628
Sorry, that's one of my things relevant to the thread--arbitrarily considering functions superior to other relations.
WHY DOES EVERYONE HATE THE SYMMETRY?!?!?!?!?
CAN'T THEY SEE THE SIDEWAYS PARABOLAS?!?!?!?!?

>>2622648
No, curves of constant price are horizontal. The values on the corresponding values on the *x* axis denote the quantities at that price (low for the supply intersect, high for demand). This is probably why anon called it counterintuitive.

>>2622633
Price doesn't adjust necessarily. It can be constrained, e.g. by law. In such cases, if price is held low, the demand goes up and supply goes down--and then you have shortages.

>>2622638

one of those was a typo, supposed to be LOW demand. Think of quantity as how many of a certain product EXISTS /how much raw material is available to make the product and supply is how many are actually available to buy. There will never be more supply than quantity.

>>2622655
So the demand curve is a function of quantity?
Wow, so they just superimposed two different graphs, one of which had the independent variable on the x axis. OK.

>>2622670

I wasn't hating on things that don't pass the vertical line test. Just saying, you were being kinda nitpicky.

>>2622663
This rant makes the best sense when applied to itself.

>>2622676
I love how some countries try to fix rising food prices and it just ends with food disappearing.

>>2622686
if you don't know what I'm talking about you are probably the person I'm describing.

Think of supply and demand as a function of 2 variables, x and y. (x is quantity and y is price)

Supply is a function of x and y.
Demand is also a function of x and y.

The point where the two curves meet is the arbitrary values for x and y in which a given product's supply is exactly equal to its demand. Does this make sense or did I confuse everyone even more?

> People who use j as the imaginary unit

>we will not do x project because it is too big and we are men, it is not our place
OHHH HOW I WANT TO PUNCH THEIR FACE

When some fucker gives you your variable in significant figures, when you work with NASA. You end up a few degrees off in the end, and there goes 10,000 dollars until it comes back in a few years.

Fuck.

>>2622709
I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. You spout off at the mouth with a smug look on your face. You're just trying to make yourself look good when in fact you are just making yourself look so fucking stupid I don't even want to call you out on it, but I will. You post too damn much on an anonymous message board for someone who is critical of everyone who posts on an anonymous message board. Amidoinitright?

>>2622734
>my first post tonight
>I'm talking about real life
>you should get out the house more often

>>2622714
>engineers

Threads like these

Ethical review. The sheer thought of it makes me want to punch a baby.

>Teacher: and the integral of 1/x^+1 is Archtan(x)....
>Random student blurts out: + C
>Random student: fuckyeah.jpg

>incorrect use of the word random

>>2622788

Whoa. My engineering degree equipped me with little, but little it did prepare me for is to use i to represent imaginary numbers.

j is mostly just electrical engineers.

>Teacher explains concept
>Ass-kisser wants to lick her clit
>"EXCUSE ME I HAVE A QUESTION!"
>"Go ahead bitchface"
>"OK SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT, [Insert the exact thing the teacher just fucking said with a different word choice]"
>"Yes bitchface, thats correct
>Asskisser looks smug as fuck
>mfw

>>2623100

Also, my "gahh! *anger*" moment...

1) Forced programming in FORTRAN. This should be a given, so I'll find another.
2) Abusing notation worse than MJ and little kids. If you define capital A to be a matrix (but you write it as a large lowercase a), a to be a scalar, italic a is a vector, bold a is a normalized vector, and an a with a slash through it to be a specific transform on the vector...
...oh, and then use a in multiple contexts in different equations (so the same a will be different).

Just try to understand the difference between a hand-written italic a and a bold a.

Nothing but sadness.

When people cannot into math.

All the time

Also, for some reason, people don't realize that imaginary numbers are frequently abused as being analogous to perpendicular entities, and rotations. Like they try to say imaginary volts, or imaginary polarization, it's not, you fucking retards, the two values are perpendicular.

>Grade 11 math
>Didn't get bonus mark on functions test
>Ask a guy in Ap math in my english class about it
>he thinks f(x) is x

The function was actually impossible, our teacher was a master troll

>>2623174

I'm a tutor. I see that shit all the time. It doesn't bother me, though.

I'd rather inform them than allow them to run along without enough knowledge. The problem today in mathematics is that many professors/teachers are instructing students to become mechanical in how they approach the subject. The conceptual comprehension isn't given pertinence at all. I can't count how many professors teach the m(x - x1) = (y - y1) equation and just say, 'plug it in.' I was a teaching assistant last semester with a professor and he utilized that equation. After he asked me to chime in, I proceeded to prove how it derives from the delta-y/delta-x law, how slope is related, etc. I also graphically proved that the line perpendicular to L has a slope of -1/m.

I was told later on that practically every student in that class passed the 'slope of the line' and graphing sections on the test. Seriously, Mathematics != Mechanical.

ITT: moronic scientist proves you don't need to be intelligent to do science

>>2623231

As for a pet peeve, I'd say I get pissed when certain proofs MUST be done a CERTAIN way and NO OTHER WAY.

Mathematics is such a flexible language; I really don't know why you MUST always rewrite the same proof over and over. I'd really like another slight revamp of Mathematics, or a completely different subfield which showcases a variety of proofs in different fashions.

formulae as opposed to formulas. fuck off and die pretentious faggots. also, pronouncing phi as 'phee'

>>2623253

>call people that spell things correctly pretentious faggots
>angry about pronunciation of phi

>mfw /sci/ can't explain economics properly

when ppl constantly tell me how intelligent I am for going in EE

ffs, enuff already, I know im a fucking genius

but god damn guys, take a break.

>>2623265
kill yourself you fucking nigger, you're bad at science

when people dont know the fucking subjunctive tense.

also related: when my english teacher uses incorrect grammar. fucking bitch.

>>2623253

That is how I've heard it pronounced by Greeks.

Although I can understand why people pronounce them "fie" or "mew" because "fee" and "mee" could be confused for English words.

Goddamn, just thought of another one. Leaving out the leading zero in a decimal number between 0 and 1. Don't expect much support on this, but it pisses me off.

>Stealing my shit.

>They punch me first

>>2626193

Agreed.