/sci/ - Science & Math

also im looking for the train dilemma with the 1+2+3 people bunched up and then the -1/12 meme, anyone have that?

in addition to that, i'm look for the one with the same riemann zeta function continuation meme with someone asking whats practical in math, with someone answering with "someone in the street gives you 1 dollar and says they'll give u an extra dollar on top of that value the next day, and so on. a mathematician would know what he is trying to do - steal -1/12 dollars from you. theres a real life application"

>>8691440
I got you bro

>>8691433
I keked heartily at this

>>8691440

Good thread so far

>>8691533
It actually doesn't look that bad. I'm curious as to what theta sub 12 in the bottom is coming from though.

>>8691548
This isn't that far off to how he acts lmao. I'm loving the change from in to on, it satisfies my autism

>>8691433
Might be a bit autistic to ask, but is that discrepancy just floating point error (assuming they did the division with a computer)? If it's not, it could continue to diverge after some arbitrary number of terms.

>>8691552
That's the joke

>>8691556
My bergs knows no boundaries

>>8691553
we need to stop posting this

>>8691433
Next time we should have a only /sci/ greentext edition.
I love those.

>>8691552
>just floating point error
It's not.

>>8691443
I'm not familiar with summation notation, so would you please help a guy out? Is x left as a variable, or is its values implicitly or explicitly stated in the summation notation?

>>8691631
>/sci/ - Science and Math
>I'm not familiar with summation notation
Story of this board

Yes it's left as a variable the sum formula is for e^x, so e^x is described by an infinite sum of terms for every possible x

>>8691631
It's the same value

>>8691631
It's left as a variable. so e^x=x^0/0!+x^1/1!+x^2/2!+x^3/3!+...

>>8691618
Please elaborate senpai

>>8691748
hahahhahahahhahaha engineers are gay holy shit you are so hilarious that's really funny I had never read such a FUCKING FUNNY jjoke hbahahahahahhahahahaah HILARIOUS LOL you're such a funny comedian I bet girls love you because tou are so straight and not an engineer and ALL ENGINEERS ARE GAY HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHABAHAHAHAHAHA XDDDDDDDD HILARIOUS

>>8691833
t. engineer

>>8691833
why are engineers so easy to trigger? trying to repress something? hmm?

You should be able to solve this..

>>8692298
There's no way this isn't a joke.

>>8692338
It's not though.

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152

>>8692348
All of those classes to learn medicine, but they couldn't sneak in basic calculus?

>>8692352
All of those classes to learn English, but they couldn't teach you to read?

It clearly says she's an EdD not an MD.

Does anyone have the parody of this that was posted in the last thread where the first answer is -1/12 and the second question's answer was -1/12 rotated 90 degrees?

>>8691761
because mathematica says so

>>8691542
its from the cosine law

>>8692459
doesn't mean he gets to count forever?

>>8692161
C3

>>8692296
800*1*2*.2=320 kg
60*4=240 kg
(F_b)/g=1000*1*2*x=2000x
(mg)/g=560 kg
x=.28>.2 the raft would sink when full
x=.25>.2 the raft would sink with 3 refugees
x=.22>.2 the raft would sink with 2 refugees
x=.19<.2 the raft would float with 1 refugee. Hey at least you don't need to push them all off.

>>8692397
I have never heard of any trigonometric law combining subscripts like that, cosine one included.

>>8692474
This can't be real, most of the wars are fought over resources and religion is just an excuse so that you don't feel bad for killing your fellow man.

>>8692534
Me neither. Maybe it's the difference between angle 1 and angle 2?

>>8692542
Most wars are fought over social power and information monopolies.

>>8692542
>This can't be real
https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/832352653053095937

The greatest physicist of our times.

>>8691433
How does this makes sense?

Proof that if there IS a god, that god is Eris or Sheogorath.

>>8692542
>religion
Oppsing sides both believing they their God is the true one
>resources
Opposing both belieing they should control those resources

>>8691449

>>8692495
But where should he start? Suppose he starts at 0, what comes next?

>>8692591
The number that goes after 0 is 1-0.999...

>>8692580
>opposing sides both believing they their God is the true one
*religious leaders wanting more power
>opposing sides both believing they should control those resources
*opposing sides both wanting the resources

>>8692550
My first guess too, or the sum.

>>8691521
Actually topologically equivalent to a quintuple torus, so that's why your deformation doesn't work.

>>8692495
R is not countable :(

>>8691451
The locus of the lava looks more like a hyperbola.

>>8691548
good one

>>8691449
>>8692588

why you guys are so harsh with greasy weesy?

>>8692161

D4 or C3?

me >>8692862
got a pen and a paper, >>8692499 is right

>>8692542
>those resources should be mine
>no, they should be mine
sounds like a disagreement to me

>>8692542
>resources and religion
Group A believes the resources should be theirs so does Group B.
Group A believes this god is real group B believes another god is real.

His tweet is literally a tautology. All conflicts are about people having different belives of the world, if you agree on everything there is nothing you can fight over.

>>8692542
>>8692559
>>8692580
>>8692880
>>8693425
why are so many cunts arguing over this cunt? let it go jesus christ is this what people hold on to these days? trivial comments? there is no fucking hope man

>>8692591

Use choice to fix an arbitrary well-order of the Reals, and go from there.

>>8691748
I wish this was truer. So many good-looking guys here in Engineering, I'd choke in cocks.

>>8693429
I see you are new to /sci/, welcome

>>8692474
All general statements are retarded.

These threads always get filled with off topic drivel

>>8691449
>yellowed
Every
Fucking
Time

>>8692296
>>8692513
Density of seawater is about 1020 kg/m3
1020 - 800 = 220 kg/m3
220 * (1*2*.2) = 88kg (that's the raft's displacement)
There is room for just one.

>>8691440
>Physicist
>Not "It's on the order of 10"

So close, yet so far.

>>8694006
i know lots of physicists who think "a few orders of magnitude" is close enough

>>8692580
>Opposing both belieing they should control those resources
indeed it is
>muh riteful clay

>>8693616
Diamond is not a metal as far as I know.
Hard materials tend to be very brittle, so on impact the wall and car would shatter into pieces.

>>8693492
Heh, I kneejerked for a second before it dawned on me.

>>8692735
I don't want to believe this.

>>8691556

>>8692377
kek, a professor showed us this with a 4, guess he lied and it is a known joke between mathematicians

>>8692377
also, it's not entirely accurate
from 8+ it goes to infinity, but from 8- it goes to minus infinity, therefore the limit does not exist

>>8694073
just

>>8692615
maybe i need 5 pl8 after all (after some suitable identifications in an arbitrary base point on each pl8)

>>8694669

>>8694680

>>8694683
Why none of my textbooks have this kind of funny remarks

>>8691453
can anyone explain whats wrong with this?

>>8695315
a jagged line isnt a smooth line

>>8695315
10000000000 eons in ms paint

>>8692876
How do you do this

>>8695363
>>8695396
Restating the fallacy using different examples doesn't actually explain the problem, you know.

>>8695315
the arc length functional is not continuous in the L0 topology

Do people here actually believe OPs pic is a floating point issue or is this a troll?

OPs result us the Borweign integral and also has a Wikipedia article

>>8691748
>Using a triple integral to find the area of a sphere
>Not just rotating the equation for a semi-circle around the x-axis

>>8691631
Jesus fucking christ read a book retard

>>8696344
A knows that B doesn't know, so we can deduce that it's not on track a or track b.
With this information, B finds the answer, so we can eliminate track 1, since it's the only one that would not give him sufficient knowledge .
Lastly, A states he now knows too, so it has to be c3, as A wouldn't have been able to deduce the anwser if it was track d.

>>8696491
>giant powder

>>8691631
Anything raised to 0 power is 1. Euler's number is the summation of 1/n! where n starts at 0 and goes to infinity.

>>8691631
[math]e^x=1+\frac{x}{1!}+\frac{x^2}{2!}+\frac{x^3}{3!}+\frac{x^4}{4!}+...= \sum^\infty _{k=0}\frac{x^k}{k!}[/math]
look up taylor series

>>8691631
float x = 42;
float sum = 0;

for (int k = 0; ;k++)
sum += (pow (x, k) / factorial (k);

>>8696487
>Borweign integral
I honestly hadn't bothered checking

What different fields call a ffm threesome:

Physicists:
Double slit experiment.

Chemists:
Double bonding

Astronomers:
Three body problem

Engineers:
Fucking gross, dude, like, who'd enjoy that?

>>8695315

Tha newly formed circle would be stepped. Those steps would have an "area" so small it would be insignifcant, but they would be so many it would make up for their size

>>8693429
This is Christian board, please refrain from taking the Lord's name in vain

>>8691556
How would using Newton's equation be an improvement over Einstein more accurate version?

>>8691748
DELET THIS

>>8692161
There is a much harder version of the same principle. So after Albert we know it can't be 5 or 6, and if Bernard then knows it it can only be B4.

>>8697704
How would approximating gravity to 10 when it's closer to 9.8 be an improvement?

tl;dr that's the joke

>>8697325
jesus fucking christ

>>8692474
Only Siths deal in absolutes

>>8697401
It stops being a funny joke and starts being a fact if they're not in reverse order.

See how this is funny bc of how ridiculously false it is

>>8696996
> Engineers:
Flexible bodies dynamics
Multibody linkages

>>8695315
pi is actually equal to 2, not 4

>>8692298
Will I be a famous scientist if a publish a paper about Simpsons rule then?

>>8692474
really jogs my noggin

>>8693562
What kind of maths is this?

>>8692876
I don't know how you eliminated D4

>>8698706
Nevermind, I'm retarded

A retired statistician who was 131 years old was asked on his birthday how he felt. He said "I feel like I'm 32"

>>8693616
hardness is no indication of resistance to inertia. it is an indication of how resistant it is to scratching, or shearing apart from other things that are softer than it.

>>8698922
case in point, a 1 ton wrecking ball, swung at full strength by a 100 foot crane would smash through a wall of diamonds 1 foot thick, if they were free standing, with nothing behind them to absorb the inertia.

the diamond wall would even crack and shatter in places, but mostly it would form crumbs

>>8697401

>>8699057
Was this some kind of "/sci/ writes a proof" thing?

>>8696797
> not putting the limits above and below the sigma

[math]e^x = 1 + \frac{1}{1!} + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \frac{x^3}{3!} + \frac{x^4}{4!} + \dots = \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{x^k}{k!}[/math]

>>8699229
that's exactly where it came from, although I had no idea somebody actually typed it up in tex

>>8698628
Yeah, that really refried my beans

>>8692298
>223 citations on this
>my papers have only been cited by me

Feels bad man

>>8691552
no: these are exact results

>>8692735
Good. People should be wary of weapons of math instruction.

>>8699782
Is there any satisfying explanation why this is the case?

>>8699810
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borwein_integral

>>8699799
HAH

>>8698914

I don't get it.

>>8691453
Now that I think about it, you could use this method to calculate area which would ultimately give you pi.

>>8700038
> How to become a good engineer, Step 1

>>8692567
Has Tyson done any research? How has he become so popular?

>>8694683
Which textbook is this from?

>>8692727
1.5 and sqrt(2) would be funnier

>>8698690
set theory

>>8696348
the curve doesn't actually converge uniformly to the circle

>>8700174
uh no, sorry, scratch this.

>>8700174
What does that mean ? Surely you can say that for any [math] \epsilon > 0[/math], there is a n such that for any m > n and any point P of the mth iteration, [math] dist(P, circle) < \epsilon[/math]

>>8700174
Thought about it again, that has nothing to do with convergence.

We are here evaluating the length of a curve, not it's integral.

>>8696348
There's no problem with it.

You're only being trolled if you accept the >implication that if some graph in R^n converges pointwise w.r.t. the Euclidean norm to some other graph, then they must be the same.
That's a wrong intuition and probably comes form one learning calculus/analysis where one mostly just learns about limits where the error terms always end up going to zero.

With the circle and the square, the iterative process of flipping corners and generating more and more edges, for example, never removes the jumps in derivatives - in fact, with each iteration, smoothness becomes less. The process never results in a graph that shares the properties of the circle (e.g. constant curvature).

You may use another norm, such as those used in analysis of differential equations (the stuff Terrence Tao does, to drop a name), which detects this. Pic related.

>>8699260
>not using displaystyle
[math]\displaystyle e^x = 1 + \frac{1}{1!} + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \frac{x^3}{3!} + \frac{x^4}{4!} + \dots = \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{x^k}{k!}[/math]

>>8693429

>>8693562
>Proof: Think
:')

>>8694680
>>8694683
Going to guess this is Griffiths E+M; he always manages to sneak cheeky one liners here and there.

>>8700802
[eqn]\mathrm{Truly} \ \mathrm{the}\ \mathrm{patrician's}\ \mathrm{choice.}[/eqn]

>>8700265
the length of a curve is an integral
the norm is just not the right one to measure convergence into, see >>8700325

>>8701145
>\mathrm{Truly} \ \mathrm{the}\ \mathrm{patrician's}\ \mathrm{choice.}
cs_degree.png

[math]\mathrm{Truly\ the\ plebeian's\ choice.}[/math]

>>8700325
pretty good post, but i have to nitpick

>if some graph in R^n converges pointwise w.r.t. the Euclidean norm to some other graph, then they must be the same.

in fact, in the limit, they are the same graph (up to sets of measure zero). the issue is that two graphs which are close in the euclidean norm (like in the sequence in the original pic) need not be close in the sobolev norm you mentioned. and since the arc length functional is not continuous in the euclidean topology, there is of course no contradiction.

>>8701233
[eqn]\mathrm{B}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{.}\mathrm{.}\mathrm{.}[/eqn]

>>8691513
>tfw you pick the bottom track and you create 1/12 of a life
Have I transcended the mortal plane and reached divinity?

>>8701145
>>8701233
>>8701259
[math]
\text{lol you fucking retards}
[/math]

>>8701262
No youre just a utilitarian

>>8691513
I think this is from a series I made several months ago. Here's another from the same.

Never knew being autistic actually gave me access to a comedy genre this fun. Thanks for making life bearable lads

>>8694051
>position of atom

"1000 femto metres or 10 femto metres, we know its definiately in the detector region"

Its not because they want low accuracy or are sloppy.

>>8692161
pls explain

How well confirmed is Gen-Rel, or rather how many falsification attempts have been made?

>>8692377

>>8700130
no it wouldn't

>>8691513
>>8701262
>tfw top track saves 1/2 of a life and the bottom saves 1/12 of a life.

[math]\zeta(0)=-\frac{1}{2} [/math]
[math]\zeta(-1)=-\frac{1}{12} [/math]
[math]\zeta(-2)=0 [/math]


someone needs to make a track for [math] n^2 [/math} people

>>8697612
shut up "henry"

>>8701852
What is the difference between goy and jew?

>>8701883
I don't know if it's autistic to get this enraged by a post or if this is masterful bait

IT'S LITERALLY 2017, TYPE 3 LETTERS INTO THE SEARCH BAR YOU FUCKTARD

>>8695315
When mathematicians show you geometric arguments, the picture itself is not enough for a proof. The math behind the picture is what gives the proof its validity. In this picture, even though the pictures get closer and closer, the infinitude of the small areas out pace the infinitesimal-ness of each individual area.

>>8701863
I love this 2nd depth to the meme that some people don't know -1/2 but do know -1/12.

>>8696814
You have two syntax errors there.

>>8692296
Trick question, the answer is obviously "all of them".

>>8692300
>somebody had to measure the diameter of penguin's asshole for this

>>8692474
Really made me think. Why don't we have guys like him running the world yet?

>>8702122
No. There are no syntax errors.

>>8693616
Diamond will easily shatter.

>>8702122
>not realising you don't need to provide all three terms for a for loop
>also not realising that this was essentially pseudocode (I don't know the exact name of C's factorial function, presuming it has one)

>>8702122
>>8702265
Or were you referring to the open bracket? I was aware of that.

>>8701702
I might be retarded but I'm pretty sure the guy at the front is still gonna get fucked up?

>>8699676
Don't feel bad I read somewhere that 90% of those citations are from legitimate mathematicians poking fun at it by citing it in their papers.

>>8700130
You clearly don't understand the context

>>8691444
I've never liked this one because of fucking course those groups of order two are cyclic and isomorphic. Try harder with like groups of order 8 or something.

>>8691513
do the patterns continue to infinity?

>>8695315
It would trim until it became an octagon

>>8692161
I'm gonna give it my best shot.

>A doesn't know which pad it is, but B doesn't either.
>If it were 5 or 6, B would know which pad it is, so the fact that A said B didn't know means its on tracks C or D.
>B now knows which pad is correct.
>If B knows, then it can't possibly be track 1, because there are 2 pads.
>Now on C there is one pad, and 2 on D, so since A knows the correct pad, it must be C3