Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 77 KB, 1600x900, wojak.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11164599 No.11164599 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>be me
>goes on /sci/
>bad at math
>thinks he can get better by looking at posts.

>> No.11164625
File: 214 KB, 500x350, 1152120635023.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11164625

>>11164599

>> No.11164626

>>11164599
don't tell yourself you're bad at it, you'll throw away any courage you'll actually need to sit down and think about a problem.

>> No.11164690

>>11164626
Thanks Anon

>> No.11164699

>>11164625
it doesn't line up perfectly but you can't really tell at that resolution, it's just the normal infinite chocolate trick

>> No.11164756
File: 157 KB, 609x1000, 1896_Alfred-Pierre_Agache_-_The_Sword.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11164756

>>11164599
solve a double integral for me this should be trivial.
my five year old son can do it simply by knowing algebra and memorizing the method.
literally engineer tier shit.

if a five year old, who I selectively breed with the smartest women I could find, can do it I am sure you can do it.

>> No.11164760
File: 79 KB, 411x766, 1567977459692.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11164760

>>11164756
pretty good, here's your (You)

>> No.11164781

>>11164756
Thanks Anon

>> No.11164991

C is not equals to C

>> No.11164997

>>11164599
time to start doing proofs. All you need is an interest.

>> No.11165013
File: 126 KB, 1131x622, math majors on suicide watch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11165013

If you want to embarrass a mathsmatician, just show them this

>> No.11166208

>>11164599
I did the same thing
Realize if you really wanna learn math or if it's just an aesthetic thing to you

Im much happier after I just started learning shit instead of going here

>> No.11166237

>>11164599
there are some good book recommendations that /sci/ gives. hang in there, OP

>> No.11166284

>>11165013
I Am Crying

>> No.11166335

>>11165013
wtf!

>> No.11166794

>>11164997
I started reading the Book of Proof because I found it in the sticky 2 weeks ago and a week later I read a thread here where the consensus was that the exercises are for brainlets. So I thought: fantastic! As an econ dropout this will work out great. And so far, I'm loving it :3

>> No.11166829
File: 106 KB, 800x750, 1543963751899.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11166829

>>11165013
If alpha is bottom right angle, we can apply basic trigonometric rules to get
[math]i = 0\sin{\alpha}[/math] , or [math]\sin{\alpha} = \frac{i}{0}[/math]
[math]1 = 0\cos{\alpha}[/math] , or [math]\cos{\alpha} = \frac{1}{0}[/math]
And if we accept that [math]y * \frac{x}{y} = x[/math] also applies to [math]y = 0[/math] for the sake of the memes, then you get a perfectly normal functioning triangle and every other right triangle and trigonometric identity holds, like for an example the law of cosines:

[math]c^2 = a^2 + b^2 - 2ab\cos{\gamma}[/math]
[math]0^2 = i^2 + 1^2 - 2i \cos{\frac{\pi}{2}}[/math]
[math]0 = 0[/math]

[math]a^2 = b^2 + c^2 - 2bc\cos{\alpha}[/math]
[math]i^2 = 1^2 + 0^2 - 2 * 0*\frac{1}{0}[/math] (you lose commutativity here)
[math]-1 = -1[/math]

[math]c\sin{\alpha} = a\sin{\gamma}[/math]
[math]i = i[/math]

etc

>> No.11166832

>>11166829
Good job you proved 0=0 with a wall of text

>> No.11166833

>>11166829
That does not explain why a right triangle with two non zero sides has a third side of length zero

>> No.11166837

>>11166829
0 sin a does not equal i tho its0

>> No.11166844

>>11166833
>two non zero sides
one of the legs has a real part of 0, so for the purposes of length it is nonzero.

>> No.11166845

>>11166844
*NOT nonzero, is what i meant

>> No.11166847

>>11166845
So what is the length of the hypotenuse

>> No.11166932

>>11166847
don't worry about it

>> No.11167292

>>11166829
>>11166832
>>11166833
>>11166837
the complex plane represents "magnitudes" of i, so in that image, it should have been the sqrt(2) length, because i does not imply its actual length in real life. There is nothing that is i long, it just doesn't exist, but there are things that are 1i long, which indeed do have value to mathematicians, engineers, physicists, etc.

>> No.11167972

>>11167292
dumb brainlet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_time

>> No.11168131
File: 71 KB, 950x529, 1568522066018.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11168131

>>11165013
>>11166829
Am I the only one who finds it fascinating when this board discusses simple concepts but tries to take an entirely new approach, almost as if it is dipping into the realm of schizophrenia real fast and pulls back a second later with the result? I find it fascinating because no other place does this and everything else in the world is focused on telescoping precision, rigorously following the mainstream scientific rules and doubling down on what is established so far, or what I have internalized in my personal model as "low learning rate" if we equalize this to a neural network, whereas /sci/ has a high learning rate - it has a high chance to come up with completely disconnected shit but on the other hand a very small portion of that disconnected shit will be legitimate insights that are the result of the high learning rate trying to unstuck us from the faulty local minimum that society was telescoping into for infinite precision. Like for an example this autistic triangle, what if the whole notion of enforcing the Euclidean norm, something that anyone knowing basic highschool math is aware of, is actually faulty and we can in fact have imaginary lengths? Of course every single professor would reflexively tell you to stop spouting schizo bullshit and to follow the rules established by academia, but was following these same rules the path that led us to canonizing the usage of negative numbers under a root, something that 100% of academia would laugh in your face for attempting to do in the 16th century? This is the precise thing that I mean to say with low/high learning rate, a low rate is great for going into problems for precision but what if the minimum we're going towards is actually the local one and not the true global one? In that case, the only way out is "delusional" high learning rate that re-examines and challenges the very basics of the established dogma.

>> No.11168764

>>11164756
10/10

>> No.11168780

>>11167972
Please learn what a metric is.

>> No.11169216

>>11168131
You have to wade through a lot of schizos sending you random bullshit they think is serious insight before you find a Ramanujan.

>> No.11169481

>>11164599
Just keep at it. I read a lot of chemistry blogs; In the beginning, I knew next to none of the terms but I picked up on them. Some of the blogs are still way above my head but I'm more familiar with the term now than before.

>> No.11169485

>>11164599
>look
you fool. you have to ANALyze them

>> No.11170643 [DELETED] 

>>11168131
>Am I the only one who
Yes, snowflake. Also, there are better ways to search for local minima.

>> No.11170647

>>11168131
>Am I the only one who
Yes, snowflake. Also, there are better ways to search for global minima.

>> No.11170650

>>11170643
>>11170647
>Snowflake
Cuckservative Nazi language, back to /Pol/ you go.

>> No.11170668

>>11170650
>if I don't like something it must be /pol/
Go back to wherever you came from.

>> No.11170678

>>11164599
0 = +1 -1

>> No.11170706

>>11170668
Came here from reeddit, you guys are a bunch of jokes. To think you allow Nazi behavior, you're no different that the Nazis on pol and Facebook.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action