>math is beautiful pic related

>>7765855
What's wrong? There's an overly excited guy finishing calculus who's thinking he can fly into Complex Analysis already with his overbearing excitement. Of course he's going to hit a wall but the excitement he shows is really pure and nice. I hope he doesn't fall for the rudin meme and has a good time learning analysis and lin alg.

>>7765855
>undergrads who know nothing about math

>>7765855
We literally have the same cringeworthy shitposts by delusional children on /sci/ every day. Don't need to go to reddit for this.

>>7765855
> loves maths
> majors in physics

he fell for the richard feynnman meme.

>It cannot be, as far as I know, disproved after it has been proved.

File: 2016-01-06-125319_648x1185_scrot.png (181KB, 648x1185px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 648x1185px

>>7765855
>math majors will actually defend this autism

>>7765992
what autism? this is exactly what I did in calc 2. only if you're a stupid monkey who doesn't care about math will you be ok with "hurr just multiply by dx"

get this reddit shit the fuck out of here. wtf did u bring this shit here?

>>7765941
Did you even read it? He spent half the rant saying he wants to major in math and work is way to a phd. This is why we can't have nice things.

>>7765855
>Physics
>elegant mathematics

That's fucking retarded.
>t. Physics major.

>>7765855

Proofs are beautiful though, what's wrong with saying that?

>>7765855
you're mad he's found something he loves? Or what is this thread about?

>>7766037
No they aren't though (for none autists )

>>7765855
>Proving something is indeed writing out an ultimate truth.
Someone's gonna be upset when they find out that people argue about axioms.

>>7766042
not this guy, but that's like saying stories can't be funny. Sure not all stories are funny, and some people don't enjoy funny, but if you read a proof and finally understand something, you can get euphoric.
(Too bad the work euphoric has a bad connotation around here, but it describes the feeling best)
Like hearing a joke, a proof can make you happy. Humans are wired to take pleasure from unexpected situations - that's a large part of what makes jokes "funny" (i.e. something we have an emotional reaction to) in the first place.

File: just learn it.png (13KB, 780x712px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 780x712px

Bait
>doesnt mention all the modern fake shit in math
>says he doesnt want a cubible job
>drops physics, why, he could had finished it first
>doesnt mention Logic

You guys just hate reality

File: fire-03.jpg (378KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1000x667px

>>7765855
Die in a fire, you shitty liar

>>7766074
Mathematics is not a subset of logic, and saying so claims that logic is not itself an area of study.

That is like saying (almost) all of mathematics is graph theory, as it can be formalized in zfc which is a binary relation.

File: kc tier.png (5KB, 539x321px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 539x321px

>>7766102
>an axiomatic approach
>its not Logic
Oh, you must be thinking about a weird definition of Logic, plain and simple

>>7766103
Logic is primarily the study of reasoning. If you extend logic to include anything which even just uses reasoning, you get a pointless definition.

For example, mathematicians who study the form and effects of statements independent from zfc could be considered logicians, whereas although the work of one who studies nonlinear PDEs could be reduced to axiomatic proofs, calling such a person a logician would be (barring possible exceptional cases) asinine.

File: X2604-D-52.png (5KB, 146x300px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 146x300px

>elegant

>>7766112
That is not an example of your affirmation "you get a pointless definition". I am sorry, its just shitty rhetorics. If you want to go further, please do, maybe I am wrong.

>>7765855
>tfw i've been sitting in on my university's graudate algebraic geometry course, and everyday i feel myself becoming less and less human
the kid says he "loves" math
i don't even know how to feel anything anymore

>>7766118
I'm inclined to agree with this guy, while maths is logical, it is not logic itself, physics is mathematical but is not maths.

File: thanks kc.png (20KB, 486x860px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 486x860px

>>7766127
If you are interested

>>7765859
>What's wrong?
It's all just so fucking cringy is what's wrong.

>>7766148
>a teenager is being cringy on the internet guys! look!

yeah, fuck off.

>>7765855
>I just really hope I don't end up working in a cubical all day.

WHAT?

One of the main reasons I'm majoring in mathematics is to be able to work in an office all the dame. Let the physicist and the engineers do the monkey manual labor while I work comfortably in my office handling statistics, software, applied problems or whatever.

What does this girl think mathematics is? Does she think she is going to go on an adventure to the Congo with Indiana Jones by majoring in math?

Bitches be crazy dawg.

>>7766192
She means a repetitive office job where you mindlessly type things out and fill forms / spreadsheets, obviously.

When I think about working math I don't think of a cubicle, I think of a comfy small office with a whiteboard.

File: what the fuck.jpg (7KB, 344x147px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 344x147px

>>7766200
Does it really matter

>>7766220
Not really, I think >>7766192 is too much fuzz for nothing. What good does your post do? Does it really matter?

>>7766223
What, I didn't understand fucking shit you just said now

>>7766140
Could you give me an example of that which is logic but not mathematics?

>>7766260
Some bullshit philosophy.

Like logically, we can't know muffins and some other bullshit braindead philosophers come up with inbetween their anal penetration sessions with the mandingo tribe in Africa.

File: 1428937189296.png (319KB, 534x388px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 534x388px

>>7766192
I'm planning on getting a degree in physics so that I can eventually do research and contribute to human knowledge. Have fun just making money for a corporation though :^).

Does it really fucking matter we're all gonna fucking die anyway

>>7765992
Can't you justify the "multiply by dx" meme by writing the derivative as its definition, by taking the limit on both sides? And then multiplying by δx? Genuine question.

>>7766260
Dealing with basic physical concepts, as in force, mass and energy, you can't define them within mathematics because mathematical physics deals only with quantity. What is mass, energy and force, without circular defining on each other, seems to be a logical pursuit. I could go further and talk about other patterns, which you can count, but not define within mathematics. This would turn out to be our moral concepts, our notions of beauty, psychology, architecture, art etc. If you do define mathematics loosely though, than this sentence is mathematical, and mathematics is equal to logic; this though is not the standard approach of math.

I could say everything in our language that is not considered mathematical is within Logic. I could go further and say the axioms of math are pure Logic, and because math is Undefined by many in academics, there is no such thing as math but only logic and physical logic. I take it that sophists will hate me and all, and I dont care, because they just want to fool you.

>>7766341
what limit, exactly? what are you trying to prove, that dx * (dy/dx) = dy? what does this even mean?

>>7766330
Are you retarded? You know that there are plenty of fields of research in mathematics right? It is just that I don't immediately plan on pursuing research (aka, gradschool) because I'd rather start working and become self-sufficient before I even think about getting a masters or PhD.

Enjoy being an immature fag who thinks that by just saying you will do research, you will actually get that far.

>>7766353
The literal definition of the derivative. As in the limit of delta x goes to 0.
Please don't tell me you didn't know this.

>>7766353
And I meant multiplying by Δx. Greek got me like.

>>7766393
what limit, exactly? what are you trying to prove, that dx * (dy/dx) = dy? what does this even mean?

[hint: your post said nothing. read the question again and try to answer]

>being a shut-in during the summer studying math
>"""living it up"""

>>7766396
Oh, what you're trying to do is prove the chain rule. The proof by cancellation they do in calculus is not rigorous (it's wrong).

>>7766033
No you're retarded

t. Physics major

>>7765859

Rudin meme? Can someone explain? I thought that was a good textbook.

File: 1426121626454.png (36KB, 922x529px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 922x529px

>>7766140
get rekt, pleb

>>7765992
Only retards who don't understand basic integral calculus don't do it the right way. Pic isn't autistic at all.

>>7766112
>>7766103

Furthermore, science is not a subset of logic. Fuck this venn diagram.

>>7766527
We're all retarded
t. Yet another physics major

File: how it is.png (18KB, 519x519px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 519x519px

>>7766074
>>7766103
>>7766140
>>7766531

File: 1445443811432.jpg (63KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 700x700px

>>7765855
DELETE THIS

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TRUE BEAUTY OF MATH GET OUT OF THIS BOARD

>>7765859
>rudin meme

Baby Rudin is the official freshman Analysis textbook at my uni. Get fucked.

>someone is just discovering the joys of math and is genuinely passionate about studying it
>WHAT A FAGGOT, AAAH I'M CRINGING SO HARD RIGHT NOW, SO AUTISTIC
The normies won.

>>7766528
Rudin's an amazing reference book for introductory analysis and great for doing lectures based on it. It's terrible for self study since it's very terse and condensed, and pulls magic formulas out of his ass.

Terence Tao's Analysis I is the opposite, a pretty bad reference (too slow) but amazing for self study (especially for people just getting into basic rigor)

>>7767179
>My professor does lectures based on Rudin. This means it's good for self study :^)

kill yourself for getting defensive about a book without bothering to try to understand anything, see >>7767204

>>7766074
>science
>based on inductive knowledge
>somehow a subset of formal deductive reasoning

File: ydLnT9m.jpg (338KB, 614x1024px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 614x1024px

>How to get Karma: fuccboi edition
Kys, an hero, sage, off yourself etc etc

>>7767180
>The normies won
you never stood a chance using words like "normie" you loser piece of shit

>>7767204
Goddammit this shit again.

I recommended Rudin as a self-study book because it worked for me. It works.
Then you go on spewing Tao's book instead like it's so much better.

>>7765992
dx and dy on their own do have mathematic meanings though and refer to differential forms. But this is correct.

>>7767210
Actually.

Induction, the method used for proofs, is deductive.

This is counter-intuitive, I realize, but the principle of induction as it's used in proofs is actually based on deductive reasoning. It's use is deductive, not inductive.

>>7766112
Literally all of mathematics relies on the study of reasoning.

Unless you're like 18 you fuck, in which case you probably haven't taken a real mathematics course.

>>7767497
But dy/dx can't be interpreted as quotient of differential forms.

>>7767486
Would "plebs" be the more acceptable meme?

>>7765855
>laughing at children
Just let the guy

>>7767496
It is, for beginning mathematicians. Look at it, look at all the handholding and baby steps he has you take in the start. Introduction to set theory, the natural numbers, etc etc.

This does wonders for starting mathematicians.

>>7767528
How should it be interpreted as in the context of the meanings of dy and dx then?
I've always wondered this.

>>7767823
you should stop thinking about them as differential forms (and please, stop spamming that everywhere) until you actually study differential forms. dx and dy have no meaning in calculus, and it's just notation in the riemann integral

>>7767823
they used to mean baby little steps in some proportion when calculus was a part of physics, now it's just hard to die notation because in 300 years we haven't managed to find a better symbol for differentiation

>>7766341
Nah not really. That bottom term in the definition of the derivative goes to 0, so if you multiply both sides by it, stuff gets cucky

>>7766260
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraconsistent_logic

>>7766330
>>I'm planning on getting a degree in physics so that I can eventually do research and contribute to human knowledge

>Published in 3rd Rate Journal, Volume XXX, March Edition of some 20-ish years ago
>Number of Times Cited: 2

thanks for your important contribution