/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8351588
nice

>>8351577
Good thread

>>8351577
how can x be an element of itself?

>>8351656
By using shitty axioms, I suppose.

i like the op

>>8351660
fuk u niger

>>8351644
Can someone explain this?

>>8351667
The equation on the right is the left one written in 4-vector notation which is used when dealing with relativity. It's also just a really neat way of writing two of Maxwell's equations.

>>8351577

>>8351667
Your gf is cheating on you with a more elegant version of you.

>>8351656
By not adopting overly restrictive axioms

>>8351577
10/10 thread

>>8352259
This is a difficult concept?

>>8352308
remember that over 80% of the population of /sci/ (of 4chan really) hasn't finished high school

>>8352308
it's not difficult, it's straight up retarded

>>8352326
bet you're one of these idiots who complains about quantum mechanics because it's too counter intuitive for your brainlet mind as well

>>8352326
>brainlet can't handle a relatively simple concept
>"w-whatever. its retarded"
did you also react like this when your primary school teacher told you there could be negative numbers?

>>8352326
Why

>>8352326
>it's straight up retarded
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/581974/proof-that-imaginary-numbers-exist

>>8351577

>>8352343
>implying he's been that far in life

>>8352357

>that beautiful object-constructing approach

is this what people refer to when they say research in math is comfy?

>>8352360
sick le burn xd
>>>/b/

>>8352358
At least [math]\sqrt{2}[/math] is not transcendental number like [math]\pi[/math] or [math]e[/math]

>>8352365
jfc that handwriting

how is he a super-genius again?

>>8352326
This. I stopped caring about math when I was introduced to the concept of imaginary numbers. What a crock of shit. If your equation can only be solved by inventing numbers that can't exist, like some kind of math deity , then you are fucking wrong and the math is flawed. Same for algebra solutions that basically say "the correct answer is whatever the correct answer is". Thats what the math said transcribed to words but god forbid if i wrote in down in english instead of the ancient math runes the teacher word mark me wrong.

Math is logical and numbers never lie my ass. Math is just as flawed as any other human construct.

>>8352404
numbers don't exist they are just concepts in our mind

>>8352404
Waah! I refuse to accept negative squares! Waah! I don't care if they exist in reality! Waah!

>>8352411
Waah! I refuse to accept negative numbers! Waah! I don't care if they exist in reality! Waah!

>>8352437
Waah! I refuse to accept irrational numbers! Waah! I don't care if they exist in reality! Waah!

>>8352404
this paste is getting stale

>>8352462
there's one here >>8343515 that was inspired in that

link to thread >>8350028

>>8352405
So they exist

>>8352727
Yes, the exist as electrochemical signals in our brains

>>8352737
they*

>>8351665
Underrated af

>>8354243
what the fuck did you do.

>>8354226

That actually looks like a pretty cool program

>>8354243
>The figure below is actually a series of concentric circles

That's a fucking spiral nigga

>>8354240
Good one

>>8354819
thats just your brain tricking you, its an illusion dude

>>8354848
oh, neat

>>8354240
underated

>>8351577
Fucking Russell paradox. At least zermello removed it.

>>8354296
The guy greentexting seems to have severely misunderstood
I would've saved it too

>leftism

>>8355055
i always snigger

>>8355068
Not /sci/. And there is theory in other fields apart from science.

When you make PI you aint no lab cook no mo nowimsayin like you gotsta be trappin, nigga, day and night rill nigga hours workin that hustle ta get them fat grants stackt UP nigga, you da king and yo techs and postdocs be the pawns mayne like letcho pieces work fo you

Any one got the screen cap of the guy who >implies da vinci didn't have emotions?

>>8355639

>>8355640

>>8355642

>>8355645

>>8355649

>>8355651

>>8354243
Kek

>>8351577

>take intro topology class
>first day of class, some really shoddy looking kid comes in almost 10 minutes late
>looks at me like it's my fault the only open seat is the one next to mine
he didn't change seats next time, so i guess i didn't bother him too much
anyway
>never talks or answers questions the professor asked the whole classroom
>nearly sprints out of the class as soon as the professor dismisses us
>wore the same jacket and hat every day
>this continues for a few weeks
>professor finally asks him specifically to work through a proof
>he politely declines
>professor insisted, questioning whether he really knew the material
>he groans one of the most reluctant groans i've ever heard, and shuffles to the whiteboard
>he stands up there for about 7 minutes writing out and annotating some of the most complicated-looking category theory shit i've ever seen
>professor finally told him to stop, saying "that is sufficient, go back to your seat"
>when he sits down i ask him what the fug he just did
>"no clue"
>he was just writing and spouting algebraic gibberish, and nobody noticed
>he arrived 5 minutes earlier next class and sat in someone else's established seat, presumably because it was by a window

if you're out there green hat guy, you are my hero

>>8355875
>take intro topology class
>spilled some topology onto my favourite mug
now I have this doughnut and I miss my favourite mug

>>8354220
kek

>>8356017
All of my keks

>>8354848
Bullshit

>>8351656

the elements are themselves sets in the discussion.

This actually got me thinking about what might be done if we restrict naive sets themselves to not have naive sets as elements. I'm sure it doesn't pan out though.

>>8356017
in that situation, the only option is to kill the ramirez inside and let the one outside die. Can't take chances.

>>8351618
LOL

>>8351618

>>8356111
Sun Tzu/10

>>8352259
Heresy!
I hated those in school.
All those years they told me if you ^2 something, it will always be positive.
And then it was LIES!

>>8356017
ohshit.jpg

>>8354304
kek af

>>8355637

>>8356212
Shit I remember being in that thread, didn't even use my reply to him ;_;

Can someone post pepe with those thick glasses.

>>8356303
I have a safety goggles pepe

>>8356347
no,thats not the one.
here is one in return for your effort.

>>8351675
is this the equation where its fine to use that -1/12 thingy?

>>8356371
Only if you want it to be.

>>8356377
now what is that supposed to tell me?

>>8354243
what's impossible about the staircase?
it's not like it only goes up

>>8351577
Anyone have the chart comparing modern scientists' opinions on philosophy to those of older physicists?

>>8356386
I'm intrigued. Someone deliver please. I think the old guard was bolder and cared less about petty morality than the current crop. I mean I can't even sacrifice a rat for science without filling out 20 forms asking for permission and explaining myself to non-science entities. Old school fuckers kept primates in isolation and gained valuable information. Hell, most behavior analytics have their foundation in the bold experiments of the past.
>a fucking rat tho

>>8356451
It's between five and ten times worse in drug discovery
On the one hand you can't just take the regulators out for a three martini lunch anymore, but on the other you get really good at giving blowobs

>>8356503

>>8352365
it's not research level by any means, I learned in the first month of my undergrad degree. But I agree, it's hella comfy

>>8352339
chaos theory?

>>8352386
>muh handwriting has to be pretty
fuck off, what are you, a girl?

>>8354819
>>8356091
>>8356385
am i getting multiple layers of irony'd or are you just dense as fuck

>>8356553
I think they are joking
Or retarded
Maybe both

>>8356503
>doesn't say 137
triggered

>>8355649
ten outta ten

>>8352379
cringe

>>8352405
they do to me, so fuck off

>>8355046
I dont get it.

>>8355652
KEK

>>8356472
Ah yes, I miss the days when we could just get a pound of coke and get some animals wired for science.

Some fun stuff from peer-reviewed journals.

>>8356706

>>8356707

>>8356712

>>8356707

>>8356715

Oh god

Did you know that 4chan's /prog/ invented a completely original sorting algorithm?

https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Sorting_algorithms/Sleep_sort

>>8356715

You'd think you'd at least ask a mathematician

>>8356715
>cited by 223 documents

>>8356809
Most professors at my uni have more.
not a single original idea in their mind and still take mad dosh.

>>8356809
>thought the 223 citations would be mostly sociologists of science pointing out the paper to say "look, science departments don't talk to each other"
>it's actually all other medical publications

>>8356715
What the fuck?

>>8352386
yeah every doctor must be retarded in that case

you're so stupid there are no words to describe it

>>8356715
I don't get it

>>8356717
>>8356776
>>8356780
>tfw you don't understand programming and thus can't get the joke

>>8356979
They basically reinvented numerical integration and passed it off as their own work.

The methodology in the actual paper is also pretty wank.

>>8356715
did they not have to take at least calc 1? wtf

>>8356717
wtf

>>8356981
>implying programming is hard

The second one should be obvious to everyone.

>To get tomorrow's date:
>Go to bed
>Check the date when you wake up

>>8356981
>>8357009
A little while ago it was discovered a huge amount of fMRI research results from the last two decades belong in the trash due to bugs in processing software and incorrect error model assumptions.

That pic is a bit of an excerpt from the bug-ridden program widely used for processing fMRI data (3dClustSim).

Including the comment at the bottom.

>>8357023
Here's a relevant paper:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/06/27/1602413113.full

tl;dr:

>Functional MRI (fMRI) is 25 years old, yet surprisingly its most common statistical methods have not been validated using real data

>In theory, we should find 5% false positives (for a significance threshold of 5%), but instead we found that the most common software packages for fMRI analysis (SPM, FSL, AFNI) can result in false-positive rates of up to 70%

>a 15-year-old bug was found in 3dClustSim while testing the three software packages (the bug was fixed by the AFNI group as of May 2015, during preparation of this manuscript)

>It is not feasible to redo 40,000 fMRI studies, and lamentable archiving and data-sharing practices mean most could not be reanalyzed either

>>8356981
first one literally writes the same function 12 times

second one makes the system sleep for 1 day, and then, it gets the date, hence "getTomorrowsDate"

third one checks if num is in the set of all the even numbers from 2 to 2147483647

he couldv'e just divided by 2 and chcked the remainder btw, instead, his function is very expensive in power

>>8355875
>topology class
>open seat

>>8356386
>>8356451
This one?

>>8356780
>the number is false
kek

>>8354226
After years of genetical engineering we finally made a CRSPR crispy enough to give cows 3.33% extra wind resistance

>>8356715
Biology and medicine confirmed for brainlet studies.

>>8356715
Continuing.

>>8357072
>75 minutes
madman

>>8357072

>>8356715
whatthefuck

>>8357077

>>8357099
heh

>>8357099

>>8357114

>>8357116

>>8357023
>>8357024
Despicable

>>8351577
>/sci/-related memes
sure

>>8356916
>doctors aren't stupid

What?

>>8356543
>look at how manly I am! XD

>is a skinny little beta faggot

Yeah, fuck right off.

>>8352411
Negative squares don't exist in reality, that's why they're imaginary numbers. Ha, dumb nerd got wrecked

>>8356763
>>8356796
>>8356715
>>8356881
>>8356998
>>8357070
>>8357093
You guys are just mad jelly that you didn't independently invent calculus like they did (albeit 350 years later)

>>8357250
this is some advanced shitposting

>>8357285
You should read her defense.
She's aware of calculus, just shitty at algebra and geometry

>>8357308
Where can I read it?

>>8356386
>>8357039
Except that the modern "scientists" in >>8357039 aren't scientists.

To be accurate you would need to put Edward Witten, Roger Penrose, etc on the right.

>>8356981
If you can understand pseudocode you can understand the second two. I don't know any programming languages either.

>>8356715
https://math.berkeley.edu/~ehallman/math1B/TaisMethod.pdf

>published by a woman

Say no to feminism.

More of these

>>8357140
>applied mathematics is bad mathematics

>>8357389
This article lampoons Tai's article: http://www.math.uconn.edu/~kconrad/math1132s14/handouts/taicomments.pdf

Can anyone make one of these based around mathematics?

>>8357140
Division by Three is a great read btw.

>>8352326

>>8357325
>>8357452 is what I was referring to.
It reads like Tai is defending her work, although I'm not sure that is the case.

>>8357513
Her reply is at the end, it's from the journal that originally published the article.

Ringing for the Ice cream wave function

>>8357052
>3.33% extra wind resistance
Has genetic engineering become basically a bunch of guys trying to min-max real life?

>>8354271
Every calculus course, ever.

can someone explain the OP

>>8357719
That's why naïve set theory sucks. It needs axiomatization to prevent the existence of such a set.

>>8357719
the devil put paradoxes here

>>8352308
Yes, someone took the hook of of that j. i is for current.

>>8357768
Out of*

>>8357355
I think the point of the picture was to show the common STEM mentality towards philosophy (dudes on the right) countered by actual genius scientists (left).

>>8351665
I mean, just add up 1 + 0.5 + 0.33 + 0.25 and you'll know it's not gonna converge at 2.

>>8356717
lol what the christ is wrong with these people

Surprised no one posted anything about sqrt(2) = 1

>>8357931
if the sum of all natural numbers can be -1/12 then surely that sum can converge to 2

mycelium

>>8357159

>>8356847
this

academia is a joke. I hope trump cuts all fundingg

>>8357032
>third one checks if num is in the set of all the even numbers from 2 to 2147483647

No, it checks if the num is 2 over and over again. Then when it gets bored after an infinite amount of time, it says the number is false.

>>8356717
>this looks like the project I've been given to fix

>>8356538
Yes

>>8354243
>same size

then explain this you lying cunt.

>>8358311
Are you trolling, or did you seriously not look at the rest of it?

>>8355807
thought it was going to be recursion

>>8358311
That's just your mind playing tricks on you, isn't it weird?

>>8358159
No it doesn't, it starts by checking if the number is 2, then it adds 2 and checks if the number is 4 and so on, cycling through all even numbers up to some arbitrary big number.

>>8355875
>when he sits down i ask him what the fug he just did
>"no clue"
>he was just writing and spouting algebraic gibberish, and nobody noticed

you fucking idiot, you think the professor didnt notice? he knew exactly what he was doing, he just didnt feel like explaining it to your pleb ass because he you clearly didnt understand in the first place

and you still dont

>>8357457

>>8357768
And j for current density. What is your point regarding the limited number of letters available?

>>8358003
It's easy to confuse yourself with this shit but it's quite simple.

All that the ramanujan summation stuff, cutoff and zeta regularization does, is look at the smoothed curve at x = 0.
What sums usually do is look at the value as x->inf.

It's just a unique value you can assign to a sum, really they have many such values.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_%2B_2_%2B_3_%2B_4_%2B_%E2%8B%AF#/media/File:Sum1234Summary.svg

>>8354243
> 6 Note how quickly the figure disappears when you look directly at it
Always my favorite.

>>8358418
And let’s dispel once and for all with this fiction that the professor doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing.

>>8357653

>>8354298
What is the source of this? Some christian science creationist magazine?

>>8354243

>>8355645
kek

>>8352405
No self aware live matter*

The self aware entities within a given system who exceed a certain threshold of awareness are destined to destabilise said system.

It is therefore the duty of self aware creatures to care for the system, but this will require establishment of a new equilibrium different from that which spawned them. Alternately should all just kill ourselves.

>>8355068
>that (you)

I have when people screencap their own posts

>>8358680
Wasn't me, this guy on /leftypol/ just screenshot and reused because his first thread got like two replies

>>8352379
Cute!

>>8358159
t. pajeet

>>8352339
Fuck you, double pendula are fucking awesome.

>>8356707
haha what the fuck

>>8358727
Is the joke supposed to be that only about 0.1% of kids would be smart enough to handle those concepts that young?

>>8357039
Wow I respect the people in the right for their popularization of science but their disregard for philosophy is total bullshit. All science stems from philosophy.

>>8358739
the joke is that /sci/ believes this is a realistic curriculum

>>8358751
It is for top performers.

This is why education needs to be selective, not comprehensive.

>>8358013
get your frog shit out of here

>>8351690
kek

>>8354279
lmao this is a good one

>>8356715
it is not like Riemann stole "his" sums too

>>8358751
Why isn't it, aside from retarded fucking parents actually listening to their kids' bitching, giving in and protesting, and politicians making it easier so that the average marks are higher?

>>8358739
>>8358753
>>8358773
It could be a viable course load for privileged geniuses but for the average kid who just wants to be a kid it might just stifle any curiosity with shit they just won't understand. The average person studies and practices to grasp some of these topics. An average kid probably won't have the discipline or the motivation to deal with these classes. Then again I know nothing about pedagogy.

>>8358779
That's one of the reasons a national curriculum is a stillborn ideas and a reason why state education should be selective by ability.


and a public education

>>8358780
I agree

>>8358779
That's one of the reasons a national curriculum is a stillborn idea and the reason why state-funded education should be selective by ability.

>>8358779
I don't believe kids are that retarded. After all, they are literally smarter than adults (faster synapse creation). Discipline is a function of upbringing. Kids inhabit "motivation" from their parents. If parents are hardworking, there's gonna be no problem.

>>8358781
Sorry, I butchered the original post and had to re-post it >>8358782

Anyway in my opinion the best possible solution would see each child have their own curriculum perfectly matching his or her talents and ability.

This is technically impossible, but a selective admission system grouping kids by ability lets us approximate that while limiting costs.

Having a standardised national curriculum on the other hand is the polar opposite of that "best possible solution".

>>8358727
Turkfag here, the first 5 years is pretty much the same, excluding proof techniques, programming and they only cover +-*/ in the first year. i remember our teacher showing how to count in base 7 in second grade and hoe they taught us solving linear equations systems in 3rd grade, since they didnt want to say variable names like x y etc they went like "okay so lets say anons age is square and his friends triangle" now square + 3 is triangle and we know that..." also physics gets seriously hard after 4th grade, they ask insane classical mech and electrostatics questions limited only by our pre calculus knowledge.
i believe this kind of curriculums only appear in countries where there are lots of applications to institutions(educational, business) and the only fair way is elimination via exams, other examples could be korea,japan,india and some arab countries

>>8353897
kekked hard on this one

>>8358437
J is for current density. j is sqrt(-1)

>>8357075
who is this semen demon?

>>8354256
this aint /fit/ my senpai

>>8357114

fucking kek

>>8358602
but the bait is just gonna orbit

>>8357077
Ah that's from Silicon Valley

Good shit yo

>>8357246
it has nothing do with being manly retard, it's about you caring about something as useless as muh pretty handwriting

>>8358311
the illusion is so strong that even paint is fooled

>>8358751
This.
It's both self-referential humor and wish fulfillment fantasy
Quite a few of us could have handled a lot more in elementary/middle/high school and feel bitter about what we got. 35 hours a week in intellectually stifling kid jail is no fun, especially when socially isolated or made to feel abnormal. So part of the joke is "hey, what if what we imagine we could've done was the standard, and people felt shitty when they came up short? we'd be enriched at their expense, instead" and part of it is deflecting the guilt of wanting something impossible with self-mocking and sour grapes "i/we couldn't have really done that anyway"

It works on many levels

>>8358948
>shitpost analysis

>>8358999
>things must not be understood nor explained, only experienced

>>8358741
I agree for the most part. My issue isn't their failure to understand science came from philosophy, but their failure to realize that not every question is answerable through science. You can't run an experiment to determine if abortion is right or wrong. It's like they can't fathom anything beyond science.

>>8356100
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urelement

>>8359219
Nobody takes that stuff seriously. It's just a quaint idea like intuitionist logic.

>>8357250

someone explain, maybe with different analogies

>>8351588
Is that IUTT? How are the wagon wheels defined? Unlike OP's picture, this one lacks independence of external context. Because of that it isn't very funny.

>>8351651
That's really fucking funny, thank you anon.

>>8358421
KEK

>>8357140
>The Joy of Sets
This is related to the paper "The Joy of Cats," right? It's my favorite title of any math publication.

>>8357245
Edgy

>>8359292
It means you're a faggot

Anyone have that article or a screencap of it that has the notation for a dormant scheme or some kind?

It was published on arxiv just a year or two ago.

>>8356553
That's the illusion.

>>8352405
If numbers don't exist, then existence isn't all it's cracked up to be. Just kidding, but on a serious note, you might want to look at how many things we use "don't exist."

>>8354250

>>8358781
>math fags btfo

>>8358723
fuck yeah science!!! xD

>>8354240
fucking clever

>>8358440
[math]V_{boat} \rho_{boat} + (4 - n) m_{fugees} < V_{boat} \rho_{water} \rightarrow n = 4 - floor \left(\frac{V_{boat}}{m_{fugees}}\left(\rho_{water} - \rho_{boat}\right)\right)[/math]
[math]4 - floor \left(\frac{1 \cdot 2 \cdot 0.2}{60}\left(1000 - 800\right)\right) = 3[/math]
Three refugees must be thrown over.

>>8359540
But alcohol isn't, this pisses me off so much
Beer, yes. Wine, yes. Every liquor there is, yes. Azeotropic ethanol, yes. Ethanol itself, no.

>>8359155
>Science came from philosophy
That is a pretty reductionist understanding of the history of science. Just because philosophy deals with epistemology and metaphysics is it correct to say that science came from philosophy? Or that philosophy is used to analyse scientific foundations and principles?

To see why the latter is more appropriate lets discuss art. I doubt any philosophers worth its salt would say that art came from philosophy in a strict sense even though aesthetics is a major branch in philosophy. It is great to have a philosophical background in aesthetics to create a better piece, but does that mean that art as a subject came from philosophy? Obviously it didn't. In the same sense science doesn't come from philosophy. To know the foundations of something isn't the same as knowing the subject per se. Considering the opposite is one of the most classical fallacies in history. In the same way that knowing science as a whole doesn't mean you necessarily know the foundational aspects of science. You could consider math and set theory/logic. You can have a lot of knowledge about math and many of its branches without knowing (that much) about set theory or logic and viceversa. Also, what many proper scientists ask is that in order to have a proper discussion about a controversial topic such as abortion, you should be informed thoroughly about the subject which is really difficult if you don't have some sort of degree in it. Understanding the development of a fetus, the definition of life, the possible complications in abortion and the like will help you a lot when trying to then asign then some moral value true philosophy. The thing is, that while is it asked and encouraged for people in STEM (at least in my uni) to try and complement our knowledge with philosophy and humanities alike, I really don't see this sort of global interest in humanities departments. It seems that they see learning science and math as a chore which is antintelectual

>>8351618
kek

>>8352358

>>8354243
fuckin troll

>>8355640
Someone explain this too me

>>8359155
>>8360265
>Science came from philosophy
Actually that's a common misconception, they both descend from a common ancestor

>>8360295
Memes?

>>8351658
>>8351714
Kek

>>8354237
ABSOLUTE MADMAN

>>8355642
I guess since he's immortal he can take the suit off and throw it to change direction

My favorite meme.

>>8360197
What are you sperging about?

>>8360321
I don't believe simple syntax errors really belong in that meme.
Unless I'm missing something else.

>>8360339
the problem isnt that its an error.
the problem is that it isnt an error (or at least, doesnt behave intuitively)

>>8358570

>>8360417
I didn't mean an "error" as in it won't compile, I mean an error as in it's not a logic flaw it's just a syntax mistake, if you prefer.

>>8360427
That's kinda the meme. They're all logical errors.

>>8360454
The point is this one isn't.

>>8360459
Logically, from the standpoint of someone graduating out of college, the syntax shown could be correct. Syntactically it isn't. Thus it works. Clearly you don't understand the meme.

>>8360461
>Logically, from the standpoint of someone graduating out of college, the syntax shown could be correct.
So it's not a logical error innit?

This might or might not be a meme but it legit confuses me:

y = x(e^c) + c
y = xc + c
y = c

Is this how it works or am I memeing myself?

>>8360465
I have no idea what kind of fucked up algebra you were taught anon. You made all the mistakes.

>>8360465
What are you even doing there?

>>8360468
>>8360469

I'm being serious here. As far as my reasoning goes if e^c is a constant and it's multiplying x, then the result is another constant that spawned from x and the first constant. What is the right way to simplify it then?

>>8360472
A variable times a constant is still variable. What the fuck anon?

>>8360463
Perhaps I'm not explaining this right. The meme's about common graduate mistakes or graduate ways of doing things. Even if they're right, the way that something is done is wrong. In this case, they're just wrong, but it's such a common mistake that people never figure out in a lot of CS curricula.

>>8360472
this >>8360474

using your fucked up reduction, you could perform a substitution s.t. the function equals any arbitrary linear function

>>8360474

Can I at least make

y = xe^c + c
y = xc

or not even that? This stuff is legit confusing.

>>8360480
No, you can condense it down to
y = xk + c

The two constants are not the same and can't be condensed. Not to mention the second one doesn't have x in it so I don't know why you think you can combine it.

>>8360484

I figured that since any amount of constants doing whatever operations always add up to some quantity, you might just remove them all and replace them with a single constant being added that's worth that quantity.

>>8360489
Unless you're just giving me the wrong equation and it should be y = xe^(c + c), which would be able to condense to y = xc, no. You still have to treat constants as though they were actual numbers. You can't condense y = xe^3 + 3 can you?

>>8360490

What I mean is that, for example

y = x(e^3) + 3

There must be a number z that makes true

y = xz

And another number w that makes true

y = x+w

So that

y = x+w = xz = x(e^3) + 3

And that's how I thought constants worked.

>>8360501
Okay, let's try to prove that you're right and solve for z.
Set them equal to each other.
xz = xe^3 + 3

Move common terms to one side.
xz - xe^3 = 3

Factor out x.
x(z-e^3) = 3

Divide by x.
z-e^3 = 3/x

Move over e^3.
z = 3/x + e^3.

As you can tell from the result of 3/x + e^3, z is not constant. The definition of z contains a variable in it. And now for your other one.
x + w = xe^3 + 3

Shift around.
w = xe^3 - x + 3

There's still a variable in the definition. You can't do what you want to do. Who the fuck taught you? It's all fucking wrong.

>>8360507

>As you can tell from the result of 3/x + e^3, z is not constant. The definition of z contains a variable in it.

I think I kinda understand. I thought that constant was one specific value, but you're apparently implying that the equation has to remain true for all the possible values of the constant instead.

>>8360501
please review basic high school algebra w/r/t equations of lines and curves and what distinguishes different lines and curves

>>8360516
A constant is not a specific value, but it should be treated as though it were a specific value. So yes, the equation must remain true for all possible values of the constant.

>>8360516
idk what the hell you're going on about, set the constant to a fixed number. Say 3.

Then for NO value of z does y=kx +3 = zx for all values of x. It will be true at a single point--a single value of x--but remember this must hold for ALL values of x.

It has nothing to do with the constant. The only time the above would be true is in the one super-special case of the additive constant being 0.

>>8360519
>>8360523

gomen

>>8360521

thanks anon, now I gotta redo weeks of homework

>>8360531
hah faggot

>>8356782
how interesting. Amazed this wasn't a troll. The way it works is quite interesting too.

>>8357140
Ha! I posted that list years ago.

There is also
>Making the most out of zero branes and a weak background

Here's a recent paper
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.0799v3.pdf

Also, see this list:
http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~jjohanns/cute.html

>>>>8359454
Yes, in the sense that the Joy of Cats is a reference to the former. I think.
Btw., from a didactic perspective, I consider that to be a horrible piece of notes.

Completely unrelated question, does anyone know how to approach
log(x+d)==x^r
in x, when d != 0 and r != 1?
Graphically there seems to be one neat solution, always.
I'm trying to gain some intuition comparing powers of x and powers of log of x (or x+1).

>>8360321
I dont really know a lot about pointers, can someone explain this one to me?

It just looks like hes declaring 2 pointers.

>>8356782
I read about sleep sort in a textbook a while back and didnt know it was a 4chan invention.

>>8355645
This
I like this.

>>8360265
No it actually did come from philosophy.

Not in the sense that science touches aspects of reality that philosophy touched first (like your art example, except art came first). But in the sense that the core of science, the scientific method, was devised as a philosophical response to questions in epistemology. The art analogy doesn't work because philosophy never told anyone "paint like this, draw like that, etc"

What you said about abortion and needing to have a scientific basis is a good example of when philosophy and science can commingle well. But that's not the discussion.

But I completely agree with the need to pair the two (humanities and STEM) to be more well rounded and to excel in both fields. I also agree that the humanities people are waaaay to reluctant to learn STEM compared to the STEM guys learning about the humanities. Although the STEM elitism doesn't help the divide too much.

>>8360295
What would you call that common ancestor? Logic?

>>8360844
I'm pretty sure only the first is a pointer while the second is an int.