/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4746168]

mfw I'm going to fail an economics exam tomorrow because none of my professors/teachers can explain the fundamentally mathematical theories with calc.

Babby math discussion thread anyone?

[resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e No.4746179]

Just set it equal to zero.

[Blackman No.4746189]

I think what we're seeing here is culture clash. Since we're from two different parts of the country we were raised and grew around different types of people. Even if we started off as blank slates when we were babies, we ended up being two completely different humans that come from the same species, all because of the nurture in our environment. It's almost as if we grew up on different planets with different atmospheres so we evolved differently. It's amazing that we're both still human, despite our diversity.

[Anonymous No.4746193]

>>4746168
What is that?

[resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e No.4746204]

>>4746189

Elicited a hearty guffaw

[Anonymous No.4746207]

>>4746189
That may be taking it too far. I'm just not that good at understanding verbal arguments on quantitative matters

[Anonymous No.4746210]

resident econ, what's going on in that picture. Care to give a fun lecture?

[Anonymous No.4746213]

>>4746210

I'm not OP, but it looks like an optimization problem from an AKL production function.

And to OP, why are you failing? This is easy math. Don't blame the professors or the subjects just because you fail to understand the concept/ whatever excuse that you aren't using calc.

[Anonymous No.4746216]

I assume you are taking some advanced level shit?

entry level is so basic you dont need calc

[Anonymous No.4746229]

>>4746216
Op here. No, entry level hence babby or no math. Feels like these stylized stuff leads to more questions than answers, there's always this easy highschool-level math explanation for some of my difficulties that fails to materialize even though I'm sure they exist. Instead there's hurrdurr "It is known" answers.
I'm really bad at rote learning so this really drops my motivation

[EXeCONMAN No.4746258]

>>4746179

Simple optimization made to look difficult

Without any definitions for variables, I cannot tell you any of the interpretations of the results.

However, using the Lagrangian Optimization Method, you can create an equation that will give you optimal response equations. Should the constrants/minimization take the appropriate functional forms, you can solve for the optimal variable choice in terms of parameters of the models.

In this case, the problem wants to minimize Wt*T+We*E. To use the Lagrangian Optimization Method, you can create an equation that maximizes some variable (In this case, L). You will then take the derivative for each variable. This will give you a set of response functions (this step assumes that the variables are independent, so d/dE [T] = 0 for simplicity).

Once this is done, you can find optimal variable choices by setting the derivates equal to zero (you should also make sure that you have found a global max to be thorough). Solve the system of response equations so that you have each of the variables (E, T, and lambda) solved in terms of parameters (We, Wt, v, D). This is your optimal solution.

[resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e No.4746612]

>>4746210
>>4746213
>>4746258

I dont actually recall what the question was about. I took Intermediate micro over a year ago and that was the peak of the difficulty of that class I believe. But this execonman fellow described the math in the problem perfectly.

Damn, I miss intermediate micro.