/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6689288

>>6689288
Euler's identity

8=====D

Barnett's identity.

0.999...=1

>>6689369
this, its a gift to all mankind from the genius who disproved relativity, we could be riding in our alcubierre drives with our quantum qualia riding on laser beams across the galaxy with michio kucko right now if it wasn't for faggots who dont have faith in barnetts identity like other math concepts

http://www.scribd.com/doc/233602815/Barnetts-Identity-Pdf1

>>6689424
>only viewed 394 times..

Howe do we get this to the mainstream.

>>6689453
reddit, IFLS, vsauce
=, twitter

>>6689406
That's the stupidest thing I've ever seen.

i like the Lawson Criterion

E=mc2

>>6689288
0! = 1
It literally proves that something can come from nothing.

e^(-43x)=log(x^x-3)

>>6689507
Not it doesn't just stop

>>6689510
It mathematically demonstrates that it is not impossible for something to result from operations on nothing.

>>6689517
Whatever you say, pseudo intellectual redditor.

>>6689517
1+0 = 1

1^0 = 1

Do these amaze your child-like intellect as well?

>>6689518
Its not what I say, it is what is immediately apparent by the very simple equation that you can't even understand because you are too busy being ashamed of browsing reddit and projecting your dipshittery on everyone else.

>>6689518
What about
0/0=1 WHOAH SOMETHING FROM NOTHING

Barne- oh wait..

0.999..-oh wait..

damn...

>>6689522
Those aren't examples of something coming from nothing, though, they are examples of something 1 resulting from 1 and nothing else.

>>6689524
The answer to that is undefined, not 1.

>>6689517
0-0=0 WHOAH NOTHING FROM NOTHING BRO

lim dx/dx = 0 WHOAHHHH

What about 0*x=0 NOTHING FROM EVERYTHING WHOAH WHOHWOHOAHHHAHHH DUUUUDE

And.. and...

2^0 = 1 WHOAAHAAHAHAH ONE FROM TWO!!!

0/0 = 0 WHOAHAHHAHA UNDEFINED FROM NOTHING WHOAAA

1/0 = SyntaxErr WHOAHHAHAHAH DUUUUDE

>>6689529
>implying operations are biased towards a single input.
How's high school?

a^yy=lmao

>>6689531
None of that violates causation, we already know things decay and can be orderly removed you don't seem to even understand what addition means and your multiple undefined results demonstrate the inherent instability of applying normal operations on nothing.

>>6689533
The division operation is definitely biased regarding the single input of 0.

Wood = nKTree

>>6689523

>>6689546
Thank you, I accept that you bow out gracefully and admit the error of your earlier statement.

>>6689549
Mad

>>6689542
>The division operation is definitely biased regarding the single input of 0.
kek. You don't even know what you're talking about.

>>6689553
Then try dividing by zero and see how far you get, dipshit.

>>6689552
sorry to rustle your jimmies, here is a kitten, madman

>>6689560
Why do you get so upset on an anonymous image board

>>6689565
Were you looking in a mirror as you typed that or are you just projecting again, grumpypants?

>>6689507
>nothing
Zero is not nothing, you nihilist bastard. It is the cardinality of the empty set, it is a point on the Real line, it is an even number, it is the additive identity, it is a lot of things — but it is not NOTHING

>>6689572
>0
>an even number
ayy lmao, at first I actually thought you were trying to be serious.

>>6689574
You must be confusing 0 being positive or negative with it being even or odd.
Zero is even.

>>6689571
>projecting
>"look everyone I'm trying to fit in!!"
You've over stayed you welcome

>>6689571
Fuck off autist

>>6689572
>empty
>not nothing

Would you feel better if I had said it shows that positive value can result from operating on total emptiness?

>>6689583
So mad you are tying to shoo people away now?

>>6689590
No u

>>6689591
I would love for you to stay and discuss all those big bad feelings of yours for longer, I even offered a kitten earlier to make peace.

What exactly triggered the mad that is flowing through those boiling veins popping out of your forehead, I will try to do better next time, so I don't hurt your feelings so easily?

>>6689588
>yfw you realize that numbers are arbitrary and 0! is literally meaningless since it will never occur in nature just like 0^0

>>6689609
If they never happened in nature, how do you naturally explain the beginning of nature?

>>6689539
<=> a^yy-lmao=0
Someone call Michio Kaku!

>>6689574
0 mod 2 = ??
bazinga

>>6689609

>>6689609
>implying 0! doesn't occur in nature

>>6689660
Give me an example ever where you see a one in nature, bitch

>>6689667
your benis has a mass of 0! grams ;--)

>>6689670
Got me there, didn't you.

>>6689667
When you calculate the charge of the electron

>>6689672
This

>>6689667
Calculating the time between earth quakes

>>6689672
0! is defined as 1. It was a joke mr. Engineer.

>>6689676
>Hurr de Durr, I'm not retarded, I was kidding, jokes on you.

>>6689288
There's only one equation: x=x for all x.

>>6689689
what about x=y, y=z -> x=z?
or x=y -> y=x for all x,y,z

>>6689691
>what about x=y, y=z -> x=z?
That's not an equation, that's an implication.
>or x=y -> y=x
x and y are the same object, you can call them what you want but it still reduces to x=x.

>>6689531
>1/0 = SyntaxErr WHOAHHAHAHAH DUUUUDE

This shouldn't have made me laugh as much as it did.

1 = 1

>>6689667


Taylor expansion of e, sin x

>>6689558
What the fuck is that supposed to prove you retard?

>>6689424
I'm impressed by the effort put into this joke.
Keep it up.

>>6689288
Entropy of a black hole

PV=nRT

>>6689507
6/10 made me plan out a response before I thought better of it

<span class="math">e^0+i\pi=1[/spoiler]

>>6689853
e^0+i*pi = 1
i*pi = 0
i = 0 and/or pi = 0

>>6689539
I actually lol' hard

>>6689517

This is less trivial that the poster probably realized. 0! = 1 is the combinatorial statement that there are a finite (non-zero) number of configurations of nothing (the empty set). Which is actually pretty striking. It really makes it plausible that, especially after tack on quantum mechanics, you could end up with a real universe as complicated configurations of nothing: no God required.

>>6689924
No it isn't. Remarking that an empty container is still a container is not profound in any way.

Hamilton's principle

I am very partial to the Euler-Lagrange equation. Every time I learn a new generalization, I am tempted to call that my new favorite equation. But really, all of the content of those is and will always be contained in the original.

The tensor form is nice though.

I also quite like the geodesic equation.

>>6689936
You're probably one of this stuck up assholes who doesn't like pigeonhole proofs or anything else that doesn't involve twenty pages of calculus.

Ayy Lmao

>>6689952
Go start a tau thread you faggot.

>>6689588
>total emptiness
no, Miss Plath

>>6689406
*tips fedora*
thanks for the euphoria, oh enlightened one.

>>6689869
AYY LMAO

>>6689288

Every equation is equally beautiful. Check your privilege.

>>6689507
>0! = 1
>It literally proves that something can come from nothing.

lel no

>>6689864
><span class="math">\pi=0[/spoiler]
Are you stupid?

>>6690136
Awwwww. C:>

>>6690288
Read >>6689853 CAREFULLY.

>>6689706
> you can call them what you want but it still reduces to x=x.
only if you assume equality is symmetric.
>>6689689 is an axiom of equality

pi = 3

<span class="math">1 \approx 2 \approx \infty[/spoiler]

>>6690675
>only if you assume equality is symmetric.
I think that's normally taken care of by "assuming" equality is equality.

>>6691345
and is thus as important as symmetry and transitivity

>>6691350
I'm not sure you know what you're trying to argue against.

>>6691356
x=x for all x as an equation is stupid?

>>6691358
Then every equation is stupid?

>>6691368
I'm really tired.
What he said was "There's only one equation: x=x for all x."
and it rumbled my tired jimmies and I can't explain why because I'm tired.

>>6689507
This one blew my mind as a kid:

√-1 = i

>>6689288
e = mc^2

Not the most beautiful, just one I like. The mean value property for harmonic functions. The mean value of a harmonic function on any circle equals the value of the function at the center of the circle. Fantastic fact, in my opinion. I even once plotted 3D graphs of some peculiar real harmonic functions to get a feeling for how they look.

For a function <span class="math">u[/spoiler] harmonic in some domain <span class="math">U \subseteq \mathbb{C}[/spoiler] we have <div class="math">u(z) = \int_{0}^{2\pi} u(z+re^{it}) \frac{dt}{2\pi}</div> for any <span class="math">r > 0[/spoiler] such that the integral is defined.

>>6691899
These types of results seem counterintuitive to me, and they make you realize just how much structure harmonic functions have
When I was seven me and my neighbor touched each other's buttholes

>>6691913
I laughed much harder at this post than I should have. Much much harder.

>>6689369

>>6689288
y= mx+ b

the equation for a slope of a line.

>>6689288
f(x)=y

>>6689406
fuck off and start a new thread for that shit

>>6689864
>>6690288
no, i(pi)=i(sqrt(-1))

e^0=1

so it's really 1+i(pi), but you just can't see i(pi) because of muh imaginary numbers

>>6689288
>Whats the most beautiful equation

none of them are beautiful. Art is beautiful.

equations are just tautologies, repetitions, right side equals left side. yawn. A=A.

>>6692501
>implying symmetry isn't the attribute most closely correlated with beauty

>>6692501
Neurotypical please leave

>>6689507
>0! = 1
>It literally proves that something can come from nothing.
made me grab the keyboard plus type the captcha of a house's address/10
fucking lel you dipwagon, I could explain why you are so abhorridly wrong, but instead I'll just go back to installing /g/entoo since you're not even worth it.

>>6689689
You just blew my fucking mind

>>6692512
> implying that's the symmetry property

>B. Haran, “An Astounding Result”
this is incredible

>>6692501
>none of them are beautiful. Art is beautiful.
>equations are just tautologies, repetitions, right side equals left side. yawn. A=A.

>disregarding the FACT that Mathematics is the language God created in order to define and give structure to each and every single shape, contour, and design within the Universe.

Fucking learn to appreciate the beauty of Art, anon. I mean, after all, Mathematics IS THE HIGHEST ART OF THE UNIVERSE. It is His Art, after all.

>>6689424
>Kahler
Otherwise it's a pretty neat idea.

>>6689507
0!=1 means theres 1 zero

AYY LMAO

any #^0=1

>>6692501
>that
>art
I bet you like fantasy books and metal.

>>6689667
Any and every time you calculate a permutation, you technically have to use that identity because of how factorial is recursively defined.

>>6692466
<span class="math">y=b+\text{mx}[/spoiler]
So beautiful that you have to Latex this baby

>>6689507
you are a fucking retard.

>>6694357
Don't worry, you might understand it better when they properly explain it after you finally get to high school.

<span class="math">\frac{-b\pm \sqrt{b^{2}-4ac}}{2a}}[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\frac{-b\pm \sqrt{b^{2}-4ac}}{2a}[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\boldsymbol{\frac{-b\pm \sqrt{b^{2}-4ac}}{2a}}[/spoiler]

e = mc(i^pi)^2

>>6689667

Any time there is only one of something

>>6689689
Isn't it for some x, not all?
now that I think about it, it should be both I guess

>>6694362
Fuck face,
I have a 6 year degree in network admin. I'm pretty sure I'm correct when I say that 0 is not nothing, and also when I say that you are retarded. A degree isn't required to know the latter, however.

>>6694459
Nothing is just the complete lack of a thing, 0 represents the complete lack of a value and that equation certainly describes the first permutation which is necessary in causal philosophy to demonstrate how energetic value can emerge from lack of previous value in a conservative universe where energy can not be created or destroyed.

Also your degree is a business degree and has nothing to do with the subject at hand, so if you are going to use an authority fallacy, at least feign the proper authority.

Also 0.999... = 0!

>>6694476
Place holders are not nothing.

>>6694503
When they are holding the place for nothing, then yes, they represent nothing.

the wave equation

Since everything is a wave

>>6694459
>I have a 6 year degree in network admin.

Hahahahaha,

>>6694561
> why I lie about my qualifications on /sci/

d/dx(sin x) = cos x
and d/dx(cos x) = -sin x
This shit still blows my mind, how perfect it all fits.

>>6694594
d^2/dx^2 sin(x) = -sin(x)
d^2/dx^2 cos(x) = -cos(x)

d^2/dx^2 f(x) = -f(x)
f(x) = e^(ix)

How could nobody see this until euler's time.

>>6689288
Obv

>>6694603
Fractals don't count

>>6694608
Why not

>>6694609
not an equation?

>>6694610
>"The" Mandelbrot set is the set obtained from the quadratic recurrence equation...

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MandelbrotSet.html

>>6694615
So it's a set not an equation

>>6694616
I think the discrepancy here lies in the failure of >>6694603 to post the equation used to obtain the set. You're all just spinning off of a tangent

Schwarz-christoffel transform
<span class="math">
f(\zeta) = \int^\zeta \frac{K dw}{(w-a)^{1-(\alpha/\pi)}(w-b)^{1-(\beta/\pi)}(w-c)^{1-(\gamma/\pi)} \cdots}
[/spoiler]

would be even better if you could solve it analytically without using elliptic integrals

δS = 0