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

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 61 KB, 1000x750, d53e8943d0f3864591fc23faa188332c[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9179051 No.9179051 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

what are some powerful equations

>> No.9179055


0 = 2

>> No.9179058
File: 158 KB, 1880x649, Everyday-Equation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9179061

your mom + me = you

come home son

>> No.9179064
File: 94 KB, 540x960, pisot number.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.9179082

0.99999... = 1

>> No.9179083

1+2+3+... = - \frac{1}{12}

>> No.9179180

π = 3

>> No.9179190

P = UI

>> No.9179192

thanks, engineer

>> No.9179196

1+0 = 0.5

>> No.9179288
File: 22 KB, 600x327, aec.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


What slow down there slugger we know we just aren't as smart as you, leave some intellect for the rest of us

edgy as shit

Any constant looks important if you extend it into multiple pages

the equation that gets every brainlet into a twist

dude -1/12 lmao

>>9179192 said it best

extra meme'd

>> No.9179321 [DELETED] 


>> No.9179322

[math]\int_\Omega d\omega=\int_{\partial\Omega}\omega[/math]

>> No.9179324

[eqn] \delta \mathcal { S } = 0 [/eqn]
It's sooooo elegant you guys.

>> No.9179333

Not an equation, but powerful nonetheless:
If [math]\phi: G \longrightarrow H [/math] is a group homomorphism, then
[math] H \cong G / \text{ker}\phi [/math]

"The First Group Isomorphism Theorem"

>> No.9179347


>> No.9179354


>> No.9179373

>generalized stokes theorem

You're a small fry.

>> No.9179375

Such shitty rendering on the font compared to the picture. Makes it look like a poor attempt at making this seem overly illustrious

>> No.9179387

>not the isomorphism theorems for universal algebras
wanna know how i know you're a brainlet?

>> No.9179408

1 + 2 + 3 + 4... = -1/12

>> No.9179454

e^pi + i = -1 + 0

>> No.9179482

look at this https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Stokes+theorem
>the standard model of particle physics is just a special case of stokes theorem

>> No.9179490

That's... highly misleading

>> No.9179509

Let me be more specific. Differential forms and related subjects (along with a whole lot of Lie theory and ) allows us to write down possible components of the Action in a manifestly covariant (and gauge invariant) way, and to relate the quantities to one another. Simple application of Stoke's theorem allows a theory with a small subset of these possible terms to be solved exactly in the classical regime. These are useful for studying vacuum field configurations - among other things.

The standard model is all of those possible terms in 4-dimensional spacetime that keeps the theory *renormalizable* which cannot be understood through these means. Stokes theorem has nothing to say about why terms like

[math]c_6\int d^4x \text{Tr}(F \wedge F)\phi^2(x)[/math]

shouldn't be included in a low energy effective action of the standard model.

>> No.9179510
File: 44 KB, 383x499, duckscrete math.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You've been cucked, physishit. He cucked you by fucking your slutty equation in the pussy and then in the ass.

>> No.9179524

Not an equation, but inverse function theorem is goat.

>> No.9179553
File: 1 KB, 67x35, 1476382699540.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9179556

>autistic garbling

>> No.9179570


>> No.9179575

[math]G_{\mu \nu} = \frac{8 \pi G}{c^4} T_{\mu \nu}[/math]

>> No.9179585

always liked it

>> No.9179587

I've got it tattooed on my leg kek

>> No.9179717

[math]\lim_{J\to\infty} \frac{J}{s}[/math] is pretty powerful

>> No.9179750

Why would you do that to yourself?

>> No.9179784
File: 703 B, 158x24, tex_a32577d81aba09ba2aa72ea97700b6cf.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9179830

pics plus timestamp

>> No.9180115

Being pedantic is a brainlet mechanism.

>> No.9180296

P = NP

>> No.9180317
File: 2.14 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_2249.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9180324

hey there ape

>> No.9180328


>> No.9180334
File: 24 KB, 799x177, schrodingerequation1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.9180355

>Using SI
Wew lad.
Heisenberg equation > Schrödinger equation

>> No.9180360

calm down satan

>> No.9180361

i wasn't feeling well setting c=1 man...i could also just write [math]G_{\mu \nu}=\kappa T_{\mu \nu}[/math]

>> No.9180364

>not natural units

>> No.9180369

again read above

>> No.9180371

It's not pedantism, you just chose the thing that you get taught in high school. It's like answering this with, say, fundamental theorem of calculus, when Stoke's theorem exists.

>> No.9180410

people = shit

>> No.9180416

nigger detected

>> No.9180419

thats just his slave branding, carry on fellow citizen

>> No.9180421

kek im white

>> No.9180422

People who write exp{...} should kill themselves.

>> No.9180426

>doesn't say what W is

>> No.9180459

It is beneficial to use exp(x) instead of e^x when the argument is really long. When you do e^(something) latex tends to write that something in smaller text, making it harder to read.

In calculus the worse you will deal with is shit like e^(3x^2) so you are good but in real math like number theory the arguments of the exponential get fucking crazy and it would be madness to write that as e^(something). Same reason we do log instead of ln. Looks clearer when you have shit like loglogloglog instead of lnlnlnlnln

>> No.9181423
File: 2.20 MB, 480x242, ezgif.comgifmaker.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.9181458


>> No.9181623

It stands for Wombo

>> No.9181667

>We do
Actual mathematicians do. You do not

>> No.9182026
File: 48 KB, 180x191, unnamed.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9182159


>> No.9183487

Log likelihood

>> No.9183529
File: 4 KB, 636x118, Ltransform.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

In gaudy color for added beauty.

>> No.9183806

[math]{a}^{2} + {b}^{2} = {c}^{2}[/math]

>> No.9184213


>> No.9185645
File: 67 KB, 650x561, 40b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Neil Degrasse Tyson + a popsci culture = a board which constantly shits on some guy who is, at most, pretentious at times all because a group of people worship him because "oh look black man doing science!"

I call it the /sci/ equation, powerful no?

>> No.9185686

Qen/e0 = int(E.A)

even though I have no fucking idea how it works

>> No.9186003

first of all learn how to write it dude:

[math]\oint \vec{E} \cdot d\vec{A} = \frac{q_{enc}}{\epsilon_0}[/math]

>> No.9186009

it should be e^pi * i = -1

>> No.9186027

4 is very important

>> No.9186054

ah yes

>> No.9186068

>Not the cosine rule
The fuck outta here

>> No.9186140

came here to post this
U did alright m8

>> No.9186144

>be faggot
>have never done anything of substance or meaning in my life
>get by on 'lol i am le smarty gifted genius boy' meme as my only source of self-esteem
>use my superior intellect to choose the ideal, most interesting, substantial, personally-meaningful thing possible to permantly ink on my skinnyfat appendage

>> No.9186146

lol this is good

>> No.9186147

i would respond to your post but i don't want to dignify it with a response

>> No.9186170

>Americans in charge of notation.

[eqn] \oint _S \mathbf E \cdot \mathbf S = \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0}

>> No.9186178

>complains about notation
>posts broken retard screeching

>> No.9186213


forgot the closing tag.

[eqn]\oint _S \mathbf E \cdot \mathbf S = \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0}[/eqn]

>> No.9186215
File: 200 KB, 1200x1200, thed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

and the d.

[eqn] \oint _S \mathbf E \cdot d \mathbf S = \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0}[/eqn]

>> No.9186255

lol rekt

>> No.9186371 [DELETED] 

[math]P = \frac{dW}{dt}[\math]

>> No.9186373


>> No.9186374

[eqn] P = \frac{dW}{dt} [\eqn]

>> No.9186396

What's this PDE represent?

>> No.9186424

how did you make the integral larger??

>> No.9186429


it's euler lagrange, the solution is a function which extremizes a the functional

[math]S[y] = \int L(y,\dot{y},t)dt[/math]

>> No.9186438

[math]\delta S =0[/math]

>> No.9186447


this is just a restatement of the pde in the op.

>> No.9186552


I'm black.

>> No.9186560

ik isn't is more beautiful that way tho?

>> No.9186593

Shouldn't the fundamental nature of things be.... simpler??

>> No.9186605

Sets are not expressions you stupid.

>> No.9186623

It calculates electrical power and it spells pie. Can an equation be any more powerful?

>> No.9186642


>implying we've found the true fundamental nature

>> No.9186645


[eqn]80085 = 80085[/eqn]

check mate

>> No.9186661

>The standard model is all of those possible terms in 4-dimensional spacetime that keeps the theory *renormalizable* which cannot be understood through these means. Stokes theorem has nothing to say about why terms like
are you saying that stoke's theorem is limited because it doesn't predict physics?

>> No.9186666

holy shit kill yourself

>> No.9186670

quads don't lie

>> No.9187586
File: 625 KB, 2858x5030, Physics Standard Model Equation.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If you don't understand this, you need to get out of /sci/.

>> No.9187598

[math]\rho (\frac{\partial \textbf{v}}{\partial t}+\textbf{v} \cdot \nabla \textbf{v}) = -\nabla p + \nabla \cdot \textbf{T} + \textbf{f} [\math]

>> No.9187599

that's Einstein's field equations!

>> No.9187603
File: 345 KB, 443x1347, The Genesis in Modern English.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Well duh, it's chapter 1 of the bible.

>> No.9187718

Could physics be any uglier?

>> No.9187736

That's fucking disgusting

>> No.9187758

it's the partition function of the Standard Model

>> No.9187790

What is it like to meet someone who would do this in real life? Do they just spew autism all over you?

>> No.9187798

I wanna fuck christ-chan so hard that she converts to pagan worshipping of my penis!

>> No.9187810


>> No.9187895

>muh equation

>> No.9188843
File: 770 KB, 800x517, BREH.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

P(A|B) = P(A) P(B|A) / P(B)

>> No.9188991

i2 = -1

>> No.9189308
File: 21 KB, 500x375, male_female.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

this is the most powerful sequence

0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34 .... 1.618, this is where you find God

>> No.9189344

>implying it exists

>> No.9189349

>not using the covariant derivative or hermitian conjugate symbols
>not using Feynman slash notation
>not grouping together the weak isospin charged objects into matrices and vectors
I you don't get that this is an obvious joke way of writing the Standard Model Lagrangian you don't belong here. It would make it funnier though if someone could expand this further by forgetting Einstein summation too.
a kind of neat summation of what we experimentally know for sure at the moment.
Remove it and work out before you get too old.

>> No.9189357

[math]\varphi[/math] is not the limit of the Fibonacci sequence, my mentally-impaired friend.

>> No.9189375

then how does 1+2+3+4+,,,=-1/12?

>> No.9189378
File: 82 KB, 237x226, giraffe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9189379

nice b8

>> No.9189669

[eqn]L_{{{\text{o}}}}({\mathbf x},\,\omega _{{{\text{o}}}},\,\lambda ,\,t)\,=\,L_{e}({\mathbf x},\,\omega _{{{\text{o}}}},\,\lambda ,\,t)\ +\,\int _{\Omega }f_{r}({\mathbf x},\,\omega _{{{\text{i}}}},\,\omega _{{{\text{o}}}},\,\lambda ,\,t)\,L_{{{\text{i}}}}({\mathbf x},\,\omega _{{{\text{i}}}},\,\lambda ,\,t)\,(\omega _{{{\text{i}}}}\,\cdot \,{\mathbf n})\,\operatorname d\omega _{{{\text{i}}}}[/eqn]

>> No.9189680


It's the limit of the ratio of consecutive terms [math] F_{n+1} / F_n [/math]

>> No.9189683



No it doesn't...


That's impossible, adding positive numbers will NEVER get you a negative result

>> No.9189983

whats that all about anon?

>> No.9189990

Radiative transfer equation, I presume. Every field of science that uses is tends to write it slightly differently..

>> No.9189992

Euler's one

>> No.9190058

Holy shit so much cringe in a single post

>> No.9190106

>>9189990 is on the money. Search up "The Rendering Equation" to learn more.

>> No.9191098

>923 and 33 are the two most important numbers in free masonry
>Illuminati founded in 1776
>United States founded in 1776
>1776 is used to calculate 923 in free masonry look up what this means yourself
>The last eclipse like the one we just had was in 1776
>9/23 is 33 days after the eclipse
>The next one is 7 years away
>Tribulations in the book of revelations last 7 years
>Revelations written by the free masons
>Revelations is not prophesy it is an eyewitness account of cyclical event prob caused the floods in the bible and Epic Of Gilgamesh just a theory
>The pyramids mark this exact date not just the Egyptian ones but all over the world including Antarctica
>Free masons built the pyramids
>Israel founded in 1917 because of the faked holocaust in order to fulfill biblical prophecy and match the dates precisely for 9/23

>> No.9191104

didn't say it was full blown retard, it is progressive to phi which is why 1.618, sorry trying to sound smart by insulting someone for explaining something you don't understand was such a fail for you

>> No.9191110
File: 12 KB, 300x259, bushfag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Not knowing 1.618 is φ

>> No.9191118

Euler identity
Reimann equation
What's the other one

>> No.9191121

*riemann zeta fcn

>> No.9191133

It stands for [Why]. As in, why things are the way they are.

>> No.9191354

Please explain to a literal retard how this is supposed to predict anything.

>> No.9191397

A classical field theory is defined by some action [math]S\left[ \varphi \right] = \int {{\operatorname{d} ^4}x\mathcal{L}\left( {\varphi ,\partial \varphi } \right)} [/math], where phi is the field, in the sense that you can use the principal of least action to derive the equations of motion of the theory.

A quantum field theory is defined by a path integral [math]Z = \int {\mathcal{D}\varphi \exp \left( {iS\left[ \varphi \right]} \right)} [/math] in the sense that all amplitudes can theoretically be given by something like [math]\left\langle {\varphi \left( {{x_1}} \right)...\varphi \left( {{x_n}} \right)} \right\rangle = \frac{1}{Z}\int {\mathcal{D}\varphi \exp \left( {iS\left[ \varphi \right]} \right)\varphi \left( {{x_1}} \right)...\varphi \left( {{x_n}} \right)} [/math].

This procedure is almost always perturbative, so the integral in the picture has a cutoff k<lambda for renormalization purposes. Although the gravitational portion can't be renormalized and only works at low energies.

>> No.9191603
File: 37 KB, 602x272, main-qimg-2e2de7995acc2849ba9d2885418fa691.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>ywn find a general solution

>> No.9191971
File: 3 KB, 495x57, TaylorSeries.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Obligatory Taylor Series

>> No.9191995

Yes, that's why string theory has such a simple description. It essentially boils down to:
>0) Replace states by operators
>1) Integrate over geometries
>2) Sum over topologies

>> No.9192082

The standard model isn't particularly pretty, but writing out the full Lagrangian like that ensures that it looks as ugly as possible. If you think of the standard model in terms of the underlying geometry and symmetry with certain matter fields you can avoid all of that complexity: the standard model is an SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) gauge theory with three generations of massive fermionic matter. Isn't that a large part of what makes mathematics beautiful -- the ability to take something of incredible complexity and reduce it to a few simple principles?
The choice of gauge group is rather arbitrary, which has spurred theoretical physicists to look for even simpler models underelying the standard model, such as grand unification and, ultimately, string theory. You're essentially concluding that algebra is ugly because one can write down ugly, bloated algebraic formulae, instead of seeing the beauty underlying all such formulae.

>> No.9192125

Thats actually kind of a neat way to imagine the bible

>> No.9192594
File: 584 KB, 1400x2700, 6e6UFLc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>God called the light "energy" and the darkness "matter"
nice heresy

>> No.9192847


>> No.9193974

2+2=5 by dostoevsky

>> No.9195211

op = faggot

>> No.9195253

[math]\ddot{\sigma_{r}} = \frac{m\phi_{v}}{\frac{(\partial{v}}{\partial{r}}}[/math]

>> No.9195256

- Free energy = negentropy - kullback liebler divergence.

Potentially the most powerful equation in all systems science.

>> No.9195294

Very important linear algebra theorem
A = \int_{\sigma(A)}\lambda dE_\lambda

>> No.9195334


>linear algebra

>> No.9195356

nice arithmetic with letters faggot

>> No.9195367

just use [math] dE_\lambda = v_\lambda v_\lambda^T d\mu[/math] where [math] \mu [/math] is the counting measure and [math] v_\lambda [/math] the eigenvector for [math] \lambda [/math]
and you get a linear algebra theorem :^)

>> No.9195575

Stroke's theorem

>> No.9195577

>because of the faked holocaust
ah /sci/ isnt full of brainlets

>> No.9195605

Whats that pitchfork symbol? And the weird L? and the backwards 6? And the fancy D? and exp? All amplitudes of what? what is the motion of the theory? what is k<lambda? What is renormalization?

Other than that, totally got it.

>> No.9195627

for sure entropy > 0

most fundamental of all laws and the reason why we can use quantum mechanics is that it makes c the 'base'

>> No.9195933

op here
i made this thread when i was high af like i am rn lol
thats why i used "powerful"

>> No.9196143

What units will W have? I mean like meters-per-second or miles-per-gallon or something.

>> No.9196154


Joules (energy)

>> No.9196798


>> No.9196885

[math]\text{Piggot=} \lim_{x\to\infty} \int\limits_{faggot}^{x} pig(x) dx[/math]

>> No.9197039

[math]\vec{F}=q\vec{E} + q\vec{v} \times \vec{B}[/math]

>> No.9198234


>> No.9198236
File: 539 KB, 696x960, 2017-09-24 16.08.03.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9198240


only good one in the thread

>> No.9198244
File: 265 KB, 529x605, 2017-09-25 02.51.08.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

And this

>> No.9198251

420 = 69

>> No.9198262

[math]\hat{H}| \psi(t) \rangle = i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} | \psi (t) \rangle[/math]

>> No.9198313


>> No.9198359
File: 45 KB, 500x500, 0a57721ab999b79d77c44d7eca08bcc7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


ah, the lovely [math]\mathbb{Z}_2[/math] arithmetic

>> No.9198369
File: 20 KB, 236x287, 0b5e25694f15d47ef5e82afa1a206ad3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]



A non-convergent series can be rearranged to equal anything.

>> No.9198722


>> No.9198781

0 = 0

>> No.9198833


*conditionally convergent

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.