/sqt/ - Stupid Questions Thread

is University of Rochester actually the best university to go to for MS/PhD if I want a career in optics or is it just a meme? Many say that it is the best for optics, but would a MS/PhD in EE with a focus on optics/photonics at a top school like UMich get me the same or better opportunities?

Is a BC CS with a minor in robotics from an Ivy good enough if I want to work in industrial automaton?

Is there anything like Tails with Tor and everything, just for Raspberry Pi?

>>8969777
(fug, wrong board)

>>8969809
Could you not just install Tails on your pi?

>>8969765
>the best university to go to for MS/PhD
Are you at the stage where you will be going for these degrees in a year or so? In that case, ask your professors/advisor. If not, you have more things to worry about than which school offers the best research opportunities for a particular field.

>>8969843
it doesn't support ARM architectures.

So we have simple notations that we can use to describe the positive subset of a set, [math]\mathbb{R}^+[/math], and the negative subset, [math]\mathbb{R}^-[/math]. Is there any equivalent symbol for the non-negative subset? Something like [math]\mathbb{R}^\sim[/math], where ~ means [math]\mathbb{R}-\mathbb{R^-}[/math]. Using the non-negatives is pretty common, there has to be a neater solution than writing out [math]\mathbb{R}^++\{0\}[/math] every time.

>>8969875
>. Is there any equivalent symbol for the non-negative subset?
[math] \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} [/math]

>>8969846
Yes, I graduate with a BSEE in December this year and have had some research experience in both fields. My adviser has said my stats are good enough to get into top programs as well, based on past students from my uni.

File: 2017-06-11 16_18_33-Anton Calculus Early Transcendentals 9th txtbk.PDF - [-] - SumatraPDF.png (2KB, 226x35px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 226x35px

So im supposed to find relative min max and saddle points if any in the pic related function.
I got fx=2x and fy=1-e^y
at this point usually we do a system to find the critical points so at which points both fx and fy are 0 but neither of them have 2 variables so i cant really solve the system.
what do next?
should i just say no critical points and not use the second partial test at all?

>>8969960
nvm im retarded
no need for system at all

>>8969960
>neither of them have 2 variables so i cant really solve the system.
yes you can, for example if fx=2x=0 then x=0 and y= anything

File: integral.png (3KB, 136x74px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 136x74px

How do I solve this?
x goes out as a constant then what?

>>8970156
substitute u = xy^2
du = 2xy dy

(when you do a substitution like this, when you find du you're taking derivatives with respect to the same variable the integral is with respect to, in this case y)

File: notation.png (126KB, 766x629px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 766x629px

what does this notation mean

>>8970166
it's a "second order partial derivative". You take the derivative of f with respect to x_j, and then take the derivative of that with respect to x_i.

>>8970166
The second order partial derivative derivative of f, first taken with respect to x_j, then with respect to x_i.

>>8970165
i still dont quite get it
ehhhhhhhh im retarded

>>8970175
[eqn]\int xy e^{xy^2} dy[/eqn]
[eqn]u = xy^2[/eqn]
[eqn]\frac{du}{dy} = 2xy[/eqn]
[eqn]du = 2xy \;dy[/eqn]
[eqn]\int xy e^{xy^2} dy = \int \frac 12 e^u du[/eqn]

>>8970182
I dont understand the last part whats that 1/2 and where did xy go

>>8970188
xydy gets replaced with 1/2 du cuz they same

>>8970169
>>8970173
I see
thanks

>>8969578
Question about extrapolation and crime reports

Is it really true they used a sample size of 10 white women to claim there are 16k black on white rapes?
http://www.businessinsider.com/stupid-racist-meme-rape-black-men-2016-10

Here's the report
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus08.pdf

>>8970191
woah... really made me tink
thanks fampai

>>8970191
should i replace u back after removing the intergral sign or just calculate the value of the definite integral directly

>>8970156

http://www.integral-calculator.com/

File: 76806713.jpg (23KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x399px

>>8969774
>a BC CS

into the trash.

>>8969578
I have a really stupid question. I just need you to check my procedure and tell me at what step I made a mistake.

Suppose that [eqn] \lim_{x\to\infty} \frac{f(x)}{g(x)} = 1[/eqn]

Then

[eqn] \lim_{x\to\infty} f(x) - g(x) = \lim_{x\to\infty} (f(x) - g(x)) \frac{g(x)}{g(x)} = \lim_{x\to\infty} \left(\frac{f(x) - g(x)}{g(x)}\right) g(x) = \\ \lim_{x\to\infty} \left( \frac{f(x)}{g(x)} - \frac{g(x)}{g(x)} \right)g(x) = \lim_{x\to\infty} (1 - 1)g(x) = \lim_{x\to\infty} 0g(x) = 0 [/eqn]

>>8970292
It looks just fine to me. Maybe I'm retarded though

>>8970317
No, it has to be wrong. For example consider f(x) = x^2 + x, g(x) = x^2 + 2x

The limit of their quotient is 1 but their difference diverges.

But it looks almost true, but somewhere there is something wrong.

[math]\omega_0dz_1/d\tau -z_1 = \rho_0^4e^(4i\tau) -i\omega_1\rho_0e^(i\tau)[/math]

If i wanted to try a particular solutions for this would i try [math]z_1 = Pe^(i\tau)+Qe^(4i\tau )[/math] or [math]z_1 = P\tau e^(i\tau) + Qe^(4i\tau)[/math]

I assumed it would be the latter because [math]Pe^(i\tau)[/math] is in the homogenous solution. i don't know how to get the exponential powers right

>>8970292
There's a mistake in the last but one equality where you suddenly claimed that f/g = 1, which is not true, because only their unbounded limit is equal to one. You're using arithmetic of limits without verifying the assumptions first. First you would have to assume that the limit of g(x) exists and limit of f/g - g/g exists and their product doesn't have indetermine form, then you have to use arithmetic of limits one more time while checking that the limit of f/g - g/g exists and has a meaningful value (non-intedermine form).

>>8970340
To add to that: by using your example of f and g, we have that g has the limit equal to infinity so we get the indeterminate form (assuming g/g = 1)

[math] \lim_{x \to \infty} \Big(\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} - 1\Big)g(x) = 0\cdot\infty [/math]

>>8970204
Id replace u back.

>>8970334

are you trying for undetermined coefficients? why? it's first order, just use the general method for first order linear equations. and if you insist on using undetermined coefficients the first guess for the particular solution is right.

>>8969578

What is the minimum amount of moves it takes to move a tower of Hanoi n layers tall from one peg to another?

>>8970395

oh yeah, there are 4 pegs instead of 3.

I know that 3 pegs is

[math]2^n - 1[/math]
or
[math]T_0 = 0,[/math]
[math]T_n = 2T_{n-1} + 1[/math]

Can you request books for someone to upload to Library Genesis?

Is the biological species concept the most applicable way to define species? If so, at what point does a species diverge into two in the context of the differences between their genomes? Is there a specific locus or chromosome in which this reproductive isolation is accelerated?

Hello friends

I need to take the general GRE for a fellowship and grad school applications. I've taken some practice tests and they seem pretty trivial.

Is the real exam more difficult? Should I bother preparing or is it really that easy?

Recommended books for undergrad Physical Chemistry? How's Atkins?

>>8970622
the math section is like what you'd expect an 8th grader to be able to do. The only obstacle is the time limit, and not making little mistakes and falling for one of the trap answers.

>>8970623
Atkins or McQuarrie & Simon.

M&S may be a bit dated but it's a stupid good intro to PChem. One of my favorite texts.

>>8970633
McQuarrie and Simon's approach (quantum mechanics first) is extremely interesting but that's not how the course is going to be structured.

>>8970622
Depends on your practice test. The material won't really go past lower-level maths like algebra and geometry. However, the exam is written to be tricky, and the time is a hhhhuuuuuge constraint. Keep in mind that in the actual test setting, you will take 4-5 30 minute exams with very few breaks.

Lets say I'm playing a game. In this game there are 5 valuse that each can range from -40 to +40. I can "roll" and all 5 values will randomly assign themselves between -40 and 40. This count as one roll. Each roll is independent and does not affect the outcome of another roll. There are two people, one will roll 100 times and the other will roll 1000. My question is would rolling more times up the probability of getting the positive outcome were all values have 40 or will the probability stay the same for each roll because each roll is random and idependent of the other?

What kind of mathematics do you use in mechanism design besides geometrical things?
What branches of mathematics should i study if i liked discrete maths

Anyone knows a good database with charts of applications vs accepted applications for various universities over time? I'm looking into really old stuff, at least 1990s old.

>>8969578
I'm having a lot of trouble solving basic systems of equations using Gaussian elimination. Does anyone have any insight or tips ?

>>8970889
Practice more, be careful, don't skip steps.

>>8970569
>Is the biological species concept the most applicable way to define species?
It's the concept that's used the most but definitely not the one everybody adheres to.

>at what point does a species diverge into two in the context of the differences between their genomes?
That's not the biological species concept. You're talking about the genetic species concept now. Here's a paper on it.
http://www.mammalsociety.org/uploads/Baker%20and%20Bradley%202006.pdf

>>8970821
I flip a coin once and look at the result. You flip a coin a million times and look at the result of the final flip. Who has the higher chance of getting heads? The rolls are independent events so the chances don't change.

>>8970912
what direction should I do the steps?

applied electromagnetics/RF circuits vs optics/photonics for EE grad school?

Is there any reason not to early apply if I know *that* is the college I want to get into?

>>8970968
Do it if you really want but undergrad uni is a meme and it is best to choose the best, "cheap" college you get into. Friend is $130k in debt from MIT undergrad while I am only $2k from best school in my dinky state. We both are in the same PhD program now at a highly ranked EE uni.

>>8970981
Has under/BS programs always been like this? Like, take the 90s or early 2000s for example. Were those degrees as worthless then? Just wondering, genuinely curious.

>>8970195
I think the article is weak. The stuff about raping spouses and prisoners is, frankly, bizarre. And I' sure nobody really thinks white men "never" rape block women.

And what does "disproportionately " mean here?

>>8970992
Im not sure I did not attend in those times. Got BSEE in 2015 and now on 3rd year of PhD. BS degree is not worthless, it is just that the place you get it generally doesnt matter that much in STEM if you do well anyways. Especially if you only get a bachelors and then a job, the uni you attended will not matter after your first year of real job experience. It matters a little for grad school as having professors that attended top schools as references and joining their research can be nice, but there is always summer research at outside universities.

File: Untitled.jpg (109KB, 1128x368px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1128x368px

this makes no sense, how can the vector which is 2/3 of v be made by adding 2/3v to v? shouldn't 2/3 v be the answer?

>>8971228
because you aren't doing that,
you are finding the vector v between points a and b
then adding 2/3 of vector v to point a, to find a point 2/3 the way between them
you are NOT adding 2/3 v to v, as you suggesting, and the answer is NOT 2/3 v
2/3 v is what you have to add to the initial point a

>>8971230
so 2/3v is just a point 2/3 from the origin that's collinear to a? sorry im and idiot.

>>8970924
>>8970821

Your question seemed a bit unclear to me, but if you are asking about the probability that the person — at least once — got a role of all forties, then the probability is different between both players. The player rolling 1000 times has a higher chance of getting a role of all forties at least once. But as already noted, the distribution of values of all their roles takes the same "shape"

>>8971232
When they say "the vector for the first point" they don't mean v they mean the first point, so if the two points are a and b, then v is b - a, and the answer is a + 2/3v not v + 2/3v

how do i integrate a variable with a -1 exponent? after integrating it becomes 0 so what do i do from there?

>>8971267
>after integrating it becomes 0
no, power rule only works for powers that aren't -1

int x^{-1} = log x

for combinatorics, you can say something like "5 choose 3" to represent having 5 objects and wanting to know how many combinations exist when you take 3 of these objects out and order of the objects does not matter

is there a similar "spoken" type of phrasing this for permutations? Ive never done anything combinatoric related and I have no idea how to phrase that for google

>>8971295
i don't think it's standard but you could say 5 choose 5 without replacement

What kind of questions am I allowed to ask?

How much time do you all spend on average on exercise problems when reading for fun?

I don't have a lot of time to read for fun so if an answer doesn't come to me within 5-10 min I usually just look for an answer somewhere.

I usually do this for topics that are not particularly relevant to what I am studying at university, but that I still have some interest in.

File: 20170612_135526.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

I have no clue how to answer question 99. Sorry for the flipped image, stupid phone app always flips images

>>8970889
Haven't you learned how to solve systems of linear equations in high school? You are doing exactly the same thing.

File: MicrobeamLaue_Silicon_0010.png (257KB, 670x670px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 670x670px

I am working with powder processing. Is there a word that designates the act of reducing bulk solids into powder? Milling/grinding seems to be the preferred terms e.g. ball milling.

I'm looking for a way to cheaply produce powder samples with reproducible size distribution.

>>8971573
Try working backwards. Given that [math]\log_4 p = 0[/math] what can we deduce about p?

>>8971610
>what can we deduce about p?
It is the 16th letter in the alphabet

>>8971573
Rules to remember:
loga(a) = 1
loga(1) = 0

log2[log3(log4x)] = 0

For log2 to be 0, log2(1) is required
log3(log4x) = 1
for log3 to be 1, log3(3) is required
log4(x) = 3
x = 4^3
x = 64

log3[log2(log4y)] = 0
"
log2(log4y) = 0
"
log4y = 2
4^2 = y
y = 16

log4[log3(log2z)] = 0
"
log3(log2z) = 1
"
log2z = 3
2^3 = z
z = 9

x + y + z = 64 + 16 + 9 = 89

Logic question I been wondering about

Do you ever want to use an implication if you have just an existential somewhere in your logical formula?

For instance Let E represent "There Exist"

Ex(P(x) -> Q(x) is that fine?

Ex(P(x)->Q(x)) is that fine?

In either situation if P(x) is false then the entire formula is true.

Is that what you really want?

File: puma-03.jpg (881KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 1440x900px

What or where would one find a good source for solving confusion matrices?

I have a list of problems to solve, where I have to solve for the two remaining blank matrix spots, and am having a hard time understanding where to begin.

All help is appreciated, thank you.

File: 1444433489227.jpg (454KB, 1406x1916px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1406x1916px

Have there been any occurrences of say, shitty scientists from the 1800s who don't know what they're doing (due to lack of technological advancement), trying to figure something out, ruin it, and now modern scientists can't test on it because of the old idiots? Thinking along the lines of paleontology or geology. But anything really.

>>8970156
x is treated as a constant, do a u substitution with y^2 as your u. the dy/du will allow you to include the only other y in the equation, then you sub in everything and do the integral, then plug back in

>>8971630
[math]\exists x(P(x) \rightarrow Q(x))[/math]
Says, there exists something such that if that thing is P, then it is Q. Therefore this statement is true in any non-empty universe except the universe which contains only things that are P and not Q. It's a very weak statement which is why conjunctions usually go with existentials, but I suppose you may be able to come up with an example where it's illustrative.

>>8972364
Not sure about scientists, per se, but recent man-caused extinctions could have been better handled. Passenger pigeon, thylacine, dodo, who-knows-what-on the Galapagos Island burned for fun. How big did whales get before we killed the big ones?

You could say the idiots that screwed up Three Mile Island and Chernobyl fucked away our best chances at petroleum independence.

>>8972430
Don't forget Fukushima, that scared the German people into shutting down its plants and becoming dependent on Russia.
I still don't eat fish, there'a apparently loads of cesium going into the Pacific right now.

>>8972364
Schliemann destroyed a lot of Troy VII looking for Homeric Troy, which he took to be Troy II.
It's also disappointing to me that Mendel and Darwin never met.

how do you pronounce the words "german" and "germany" in english? "germ"an? yerman?

File: sqg1.jpg (632KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

632KB, 1024x1024px

>>8969578

FOR EVERYBODY WHO'S TIRED OF RETARDS AND AUTISTS IN THIS THREAD, OF LAZY COCKSUCKERS NOT EVEN TRYING AND OF UNEDUCATED SCUM NOT ANSWERING ANY FUCKING QUESTIONS BEYOND HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL:

ASK YOUR QUESTIONS HERE:
>>8973315
>>8973315
>>8973315
>>8973315
>>8973315


No need to try to make work something that clearly isn't fucking designed to work.

If this OP has to bump his thread and shit up my own with his bullshit falseflagging, that's how you know he should GTFO from sci.

>>8973325
What the fuck is wrong with you?

>>8973231
The first one. The g sounds the same as in "giraffe" and "gentle"

>>8973325
Imagine being this guy.

How many meds do you think he forgot to take this morning?

>>8973325
Why are you like this?

File: why.png (153KB, 1157x537px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1157x537px

>>8969578

I am studying point set topology for the first time and I don't get what is so complicated about (3).
I am under the impression that it's an immediate consequence of the definitions.
Am I overlooking something ?

>>8973410
>I am under the impression that it's an immediate consequence of the definitions.
Try to make a clear argument in mathematical language then

>>8973414
V is the inverse image of U by the inverse of f wich is continuous
U is open hence V is open

>>8973418
with f : U -> V homeomorphism

>>8973418
i'm no expert but your map f is from U to V, so I think it only tells you V is open in the subspace topology induced by R^n, not in R^n itself

anyway it's this theorem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invariance_of_domain

>>8973430
thank you

PKA has four regulatory subunit isoforms: RI alpha, RI beta, RII alpha, RII beta. The difference between RI and RII is a single phosphosite (alanine to serine). RI works as pseudosubstrate, RII works as real substrate, both inhibit PKA activity. Why does RII stay in the binding pocket after phosphorylation of serine?

Might be a bit specific. Maybe someone can answer

>>8973343
>>8973373
>>8973375

Nice try OP. Except everybody has caught up to your samefagging by now.

>>8969578
What's north of the north pole?

>>8973524
true north

>>8969578
I'm trying to be a physicists and would like to know what kind of math I need to know for all levels. I'm still undergraduate and know up to linear algebra. Could someone provide me with a nice list?

Also, out of curiosity, do any of you ever dabble in the arts, or is it pure logic you seek?

>>8973539
youll need Calc. 1,2, and 3, and Differential Equations at the least.

Your academic adviser can help you with what you need.

I would also suggest Calc. 3 based statistics and matrix theory.

I like to read about politics though, currently reading about the Spanish Civil War.

>>8973546
I already took those, but I meant higher level maths, above undergrad. What math does it take to understand it all (all bring what we currently know)

Though I'll look into satistical cal 3
>>8973539
Oh that's cool, is it one sided or does it show spains view as well?

>>8973564
I am not sure, that is about above my realm, I would talk to your schools physics Grad. adviser or a prof you like. You might get more bonus points if you talk to a prof. that has similar interests or studies as them.


Its good when it comes to neutrality. It places a heavier emphasis on how it affected Spain and the world more so than what took place. Its named "Hell and Good Company" by Richard Rhodes. It went over blood transfusions and brought up a point that at one time, a man received 7 pints worth of blood in sitting. Which is absurdly high knowing your body contains around 12 pints total.

Anyone from biology/medicine in these threads?

I have been feeling pain in my head, particularly on the back of my head. It's different from a regular headache. It's something that comes and goes during the day. The "pain" lasts for just a few seconds or a minute at most, but it's relatively strong. It is mostly on the back of the head, I might be mistaken but sometimes I also feel it as if it was on the side, I think I feel this pain very rarely (if ever at all) in the front part of the head. This has been going on for some 3 or 4 years now. Do you think this could be a stroke/CVA just waiting to happen?

>>8973618
I meant to say this has been going on for 3-4 years but I have just lived with it and accepted it as part of growing old but more recently it's gotten stronger, that's what I meant, I'm sorry.

>>8973620
go see a doc irl that can perform tests m8

>Be me
>Lose weight
>Boobs stay the same size
what's the evolutionary reason for this?

>>8973826
>what's the evolutionary reason for this?
Pretty simple. Women specifically have evolved for around the last thousand years or so to STAY THE FUCK OUT OF 4CHAN.

Fucking roasties man.

>>8973829
>>>/r9k/

>>8970395
>>8970399
I'd guess it's some recurrence of order 3
Try to calculate the number of moves for like 0 to 5 pieces, then check whether an recurrence like this holds for some [math]a_n[/math] and c:
[math]a_1 \cdot T_{n+2} + a_2 T_{n+1} + a_3 T_n + c = 0[/math]

By the way, if you find such a recurrence, you can easily remove the c by calculating
[math] (a_1 \cdot T_{n+3} + a_2 T_{n+2} + a_3 T_{n+1} + c)- (a_1 \cdot T_{n+2} + a_2 T_{n+1} + a_3 T_n + c)[/math]

>>8969578
Geometry Question.
Given a set of inequalities that define a locus how can I determine the figure/plane/point/whatever they are talking about without using a plotting device, for example:
[eqn]\begin{cases}
x \leq 1 \\
0 \leq x+y \\
y \leq 2 + \frac{x}{2}\\
3 \geq
y \end{cases}[/eqn]
I had no clue what to do so I plugged it in WolframAlpha to find out it was a triangle but how can I do by hand?

>>8973836
Everyone knows roasties only know about 4chan because of r/4chan so I am sure it is time for you to go back.

>>8973848
equal inequality is a half plane determined by one side of a line, so just draw all four lines

>>8973854
each inequality*

>>8973826
I don't understand the question, could you post a picture to make things clearer?

>>8973854
Thanks m8

File: 20170613_212535.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

I have no clue how to answer 113

>>8973925
Use the difference formula for sin(90-b)

find what cos(b) is and do the inverse.

>>8973539
science and art are two sides of the same coin.

the search for beauty requires both knowledge and craft.

>>8973564
Unless you get into a really fringe physics field, then this is all the math you will ever need to know.

Complex analysis, analysis, topology, network theory, etc.. are some other applicable maths in physics

Ah I got it by 1/1.5304 sorry for anyone who was exposed to my Brainletism

>>8973826
None
Sometimes shit just be like it is

>>8973826
big tits attract males so you have a greater chance of surviving and producing offspring

>>8969578
Has the function [eqn] F(n) = \sum_{h=1}^{n} \frac{n}{gcd(n,k)} [/eqn] been studied?

Any sources?

File: 1472362242684.jpg (21KB, 221x246px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 221x246px

>>8969578
>If A and B are sets, explain what is meant by the statement |A| less than or equal to |B|. Your answer should be correct for all sets (not just finite sets).


That would imply that a bijection does not exist between A and B, right?

Something that doesn't mix with oil or water and is denser than either?
Not alcohols.

>>8974503
semen, actually. or rock.

>>8974503
A lead block.

>>8974504
>semen, actually.
Wow you're not joking.
Who would have told.

>>8974503
mercury

>>8974508
it's a necessary property of the substance. the density is precise, if it mixes with water it can't make it's way to where it needs to be. if it's not dense enough, it won't penetrate either.

>>8974502
>That would imply that a bijection does not exist between A and B, right?

No. It is saying less than or equal.

I would put it as there can be a one to one function from a subset of B to A that touches all of A, but there is not necessarily a one to one function from a subset of A to B that touches all of B.

>>8974521
>I would put it as there can be a one to one function from a subset of B to A that touches all of A, but there is not necessarily a one to one function from a subset of A to B that touches all of B.
i thought that is the same as saying there is not a bijection

>>8974523
>i thought that is the same as saying there is not a bijection

The whole point of less than *OR EQUAL* is that there could be a bijection, or there couldn't.

>>8974545
thanks, is understand what you said earlier

>>8969578
I'm reading a book on probability and came across this:
[math]
P(E)=P(EF)+P(EF')\\
=P(E|F)P(F)+P(E|F')P(F')\\
=P(E|F)P(F)+P(E|F')(1-P(F))
[/math]
shouldn't the equation be something like this on the second line:
[math]
P(F|E)P(E) + P(F'|E)P(E)
[/math]
since
[math]
P(A|B) = P(A)P(B|E)
[/math]

>>8974728
my bad I meant
[math]
P(AB) = P(A)P(B|A)
[/math]

is introversion/extraversion as bullshit as mbti?

>>8974728
>>8974729
Okay ignore that question lol I'm dumb

>>8974738
kinda

it depends a lot on your environment. if you're surrounded by decent people you could easily hand around with them and be an "extrovert" and if you're surrounded by shitty people you'll want nothing to do with them.

>>8974742
>hand around
hang around

>>8974742
Isn't intro/extroversion gene based?

>>8974738
Why is mbti bullshit if 89 of the top 100 fortune companies use it?

>>8974769
it is pseudo-science, basicly a horoscope

>>8974780
Must be pretty good pseudo science for some of the best companies in the worid to actually use it in the higher process then, I think it's cheesy also but it obviously works in some way for categorization

>>8974789
>higher process

File: 1493941778027.jpg (300KB, 925x694px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 925x694px

>>8974801
Yeah I'm pretty drunk and I misused a word in the english, but you get what I mean right?

>>8974769
Which MBTI type do I want the test to give me to get hired at one of these Fortune 100 companies?

>>8974829
I don't know, which one do you think you should have? Take one of those tests to find out then get the other credentials needed for the job most likely

>>8974769
>89 of the top 100 fortune companies use it
[citation needed]

since when does e.g. google use mbti for their hiring process or whatever you're referring to?

>>8974789
name one

>>8974848
Google "top 100 companies mbti"

>>8974884

>>8974884
Seeing a ton of business news articles but nothing I'd ever cite as a source. Seems like a meme.

File: im retarded.png (403KB, 1920x1022px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1920x1022px

why aren't there any elements in this area? will there ever be?

>>8975064
now THIS is a stupid question xD

>>8975071
why can't there be fractional elements

>>8975064
there is nothing in between because the number of protons are 1,2,3 etc

they're just arranged like that to categorize them. if you were to insert 58-71 and 90-103 there would be similar gaps between 21-22 and 39-40

>>8975075
because you can't have a fraction of a proton

>>8975079
>because you can't have a fraction of a proton
Why not?

>>8975082
i dont fuckin know go google it faggot

File: QzoIcvE.png (30KB, 829x192px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 829x192px

How would I do this?

>>8975082
>>>8975079
>>because you can't have a fraction of a proton
>Why not?
That a consequence of Strong Nuclear Force. The Proton is formed by three quarks, two up quarks and one down quarks (Neutrons are formed by one up and two downs). The problem is that at short distances the Strong Nuclear Force is very weak but at large distances is very strong. Therefore if you try to "fraction a proton" you would need so much energy that, instead of breaking into quarks, you are going to generate new particles (because E=mc^2 +(momentum terms) ).

Now to the other question

>>8975064
>why aren't there any elements in this area? will there ever be?
There is a reason for why the Periodic Table is ordered like that, and it is because chemical properties (elements in the same column have similar properties). This is more related to electronic configuration than to the nucleus.

You know how butter you left in the fridge is harder than butter you left on the counter? How hard can butter get if you continue to lower the temperature? Does it achieve a maximum hardness at some point before absolute 0, or does it get brittle and shatter at some point?

When fitting an inverse-Guassian GLM what should I be looking for when looking at the GLM diagnostic plots (res vs fitted) etc.?

How do I know if the model is mis-specified?

Is there any output in thee summary of the model which I might want to look at for diagnostics?

>>8975137
y(n)=sum ((5^n-i)x(i) , i from 1 to n

so i would say mean is zero and variance is sum (5^2n-2i) . i have no idea about the dristribuition. hate prob and stat

>>8975206
i also checked out how you solve this: sum(5^2n-2i)= (1-25^n)/(1-25)

I'm deriving [math]z=x+x^2+3y^2, x(t)=\cos(t), y(t)=\sin(t)[/math] with respect to [math]t[/math] as follows:

[math]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x}=1-2x, \frac{\partial z}{\partial y}=6y, \frac{dx}{dt}=-\sin(t), \frac{dy}{dt}=\cos(t)[/math] so by the chain-rule [math]\frac{dz}{dt}=(1-2\cos(t))(-\sin(t)) + 6\sin(t)\cos(t)=-\sin(t) + 8\sin(t)\cos(t)[/math] but the correct answer is [math]1 + 8\sin(t)\cos(t)[/math].

Where did I go wrong?

>>8975275
you got your dz/dx wrong

>>8975278
There's probably something deep I don't understand. Differentiating [math]z=x+x^2+3y^2[/math] wrt [math]x[/math] is [math]1-2x[/math]. What exactly did I get wrong with dz/dx :)?

>>8975287
Oh I see there's a typo in my initial post, it should read [math]z=x-x^2+3y^2[/math], sorry. The problem stands though.

>>8975287
>There's probably something deep I don't understand. Differentiating z=x+x2+3y2 wrt x is 1−2x. What exactly did I get wrong with dz/dx :)?
Not the same as before:
dz/dx=1+2x, not 1-2x

>>8975290
See >>8975289

>>8975275
>but the correct answer is 1+8sin(t)cos(t).
Then, I would say that the "correct answer" they are giving you is wrong.
If you substitute and do the derivative (instead of using chain rule to make it) you get
cos[t]-cos[t]^2+3*sin[t]^2
And, if you derive it you get
-sin[t]+8cos[t]*sin[t]
Which is what you get.

>>8975293
I see, I typically don't get suspicious with solutions manual but this time I was right to be suspicious. Thank you very much!

File: 1453861361566.jpg (88KB, 530x574px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 530x574px

Unironically I need an explanation for this
Where can I find what I'm looking for?

https://www.google.com/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=rohBWZGhKefP8Ae-iq1Y&gws_rd=cr#q=%22a+guide+to+know%22iq1Y&gws_rd=cr#q=%22a+guide+to+know%22

>>8975517
of a lighthouse?

>>8975526
picture unrelated/just for attention

>>8975517
How do lighthouses work if you are too far over the curved horizon to see it?

>>8975531
I am sorry, I dont know what youre trying to ask, the link just directs me to Google's main page

>>8975541
>>8975538
>>8975526

I need a guide about how to know. I, unironically, need an explanation for this

>>8975546
Know what?

like anything in general?

Work something called a top-down approach.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-down_and_bottom-up_design

>>8975549
In general, not a specific topic
Dominate the process of how to know

>>8975553
This is not a stupid question, you're just stupid

>>8975553
What you're looking for is metacognition.

Is 0 a number

>>8975627
Yes

>>8975665
But it's nothing. How can you count nothing

>>8975667
Can you count [math]\pi[/math]?
Are you saying that [math]\pi[/math] isn't a number?

Could anyone point me in the right direction for a good laptop if I am a physics major? I am starting upper division this Fall at UCSD if that helps.

>>8975709
Just get a laptop that is good in general...

>>8975673
Yes.
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
.06
...
.14159265358979
...
2.5
...
3.14159265358979

What are some good resources to study for the GRE? Want to get at least 168Q 162V and 5W

>>8975725
You didn't write pi you wrote an approximation

>>8975756
That's a symbol for pi

>>8975759
YOu still didn't count to pi

>>8975791
But you can't count to 0

>>8975627
No, it's just a symbol representing a number

>>8975792
count how many times you've had sex

If you reduce the sampling period in a time domain, would the frequency domain contain the same wavelength and amplitude, but just reduce the length of exposure?

>>8975899
kek

>>8975892
Does the Platonic form of symbols exist or does it just represent itself

I haven't done calc in over 5 years and I need to solve this step by step in the next few hours but wolfram alpha only gives me the result without any step it says.
Is there any other online or offline calculator that can do it for me?

[math]\lim x->0 \frac{(Log[1 + 2 x] (Sin[3 x] - Exp[2 x] Sinh[3 x]))}{(Sinh[2 x] Cos[4 x] - Sin[2 x] Cosh[4 x]}[/math]

>>8975791
you dont know my life

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-15 at 11.07.18 am.png (20KB, 680x246px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 680x246px

false, because if x is less than 0, it's false, right?

>>8976028
brainlet here, but cancel what you can before evaluating the limit.

look up paul's online math notes. saved my ass. section on limits, and ctrl+F for "circumventing the indeterminate"

>>8976065
wrong

>>8976028
Symbolab

>>8976069
so how do you prove it?

>>8976065
i hate these fucking gay math proofs, the statement is obvious from the definition of the floor function, how are you supposed to prove it in a more "convincing" way when the statement in itself is already blatantly obvious that it's true, the "proof" will just be a more convoluted way to say the same thing

>>8976082
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but that won't even solve it

https://www.symbolab.com/solver/limit-calculator/%5Clim_%7Bx%5Cto0%7D%5Cfrac%7Blog%5Cleft(1%2B2x%5Cright)%5Cleft(sin%5Cleft(3x%5Cright)-exp%5Cleft(2x%5Cright)sinh%5Cleft(3x%5Cright)%5Cright)%7D%7Bsinh%5Cleft(2x%5Cright)cos%5Cleft(4x%5Cright)-sin%5Cleft(2x%5Cright)cosh%5Cleft(4x%5Cright)%7D

>>8976087
>>8976087
>how are you supposed to prove it in a more "convincing" way when the statement in itself is already blatantly obvious that it's true
wow you sound like a brainlet, I hope you're only a freshman, I'd give you a 0 if you wrote this on an exam

since floor(x)<=x we have floor(x)-1<= x-1, which gives floor(x)-1 <= floor(x-1)

similarly floor(x-1) <= x-1, so floor(x-1) +1 <= x, which implies floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x). therefore floor(x-1) <= floor(x) -1

therefore floor(x-1)=floor(x)-1

>>8976103
kill yourself lol

>>8976103
op here, thanks.

>>8976103
t. ivory tower academic who will never do anything useful

prove the following statement:

(x + 1) mod 1 = x mod 1

>>8976127
i'm not an academic, but whatever helps you cope :)

>>8976136
so you're even more worthless than an academic smug shit

File: Untitled.jpg (26KB, 1022x554px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 1022x554px

cosa=x.y/||x|| ||y||

cosb=x.y/||x|| ||y||

a=/=b
cosa=/=cosb

x.y/||x|| ||y||=/=x.y/||x|| ||y||

how woke am i?

>>8976139
cosb=-x.y/||x|| ||y||

>>8976138
>ivory tower academics never do anything useful
>non-academics are also worthless
you sound very bitter my friend

>>8976136
prove this: >>8976131

stupid fag

>>8976147
you sound very retarded fag

>>8976148
are you retarded?

x+1-x=1 is divisible by 1

therefore x+1 = x mod 1

>>8976150
thanks :)

>>8976151
the point > your head

>>8976131 is as obvious as >>8976065

>>8976154
>>>8976131 is as obvious as >>8976065
apparently it's not since that other brainlet couldn't even prove the floor one (i hope to god he could prove the mod equality)

>>8976159
http://psych.colorado.edu/~vanboven/teaching/p7536_heurbias/p7536_readings/kruger_dunning.pdf

>>8976150
[eqn]\mathbb{PIGGOT}[/eqn]

>>8976161
>http://psych.colorado.edu/~vanboven/teaching/p7536_heurbias/p7536_readings/kruger_dunning.pdf

>>8976165
>meme.jpg
oh it's this literal troll again

if you unironically believe your class width crap you're just pathetic

>>8971605
granulate?

>>8976175
>if you unironically believe your class width crap you're just pathetic
Which part do you need explained, brainlet?

>>8976204
>reusing old bait
have a (You)

>>8976213
>restarting an argument you've already had debunked multiple times
into the trash (You) go

File: Capture.png (31KB, 353x123px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 353x123px

>>8976217
you're not fooling anyone

>>8976204
due to rounding, in your example the class width as used in statistics is 2.5-0.5=2

>>8976231
I'm happy to know you can at least count properly, hopefully one day you'll understand class width!

>>8976244
seek help

>>8976246
I'm doing fine my friend, but thanks for your concern!

Why don't we bury nuclear waste in subduction zones? Then all the nuclear waste would eventualy just get pulled into the mantle, and we wouldn't need to worry about people 50,000 years from now accidentally digging it up.

>>8976103
lol thats wrong

>>8976361
>lol thats wrong
not an arguement

>>8976151
lol you could just say that 1 (mod1) = 0 (mod 1)
>>8976154
i would have to agree, its just too obvious

How do I stop forgetting about important things like a stupid fucking asshole?

>>8976350
why would you throw money into a volcano?

>>8969578
I want to start engineering next year are there really no girls or is that a meme? Should I do maths as well for the better gender ratio?

File: when-someone-think-they-have-an-argument-but-its-not-2777133.png (54KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x534px

>>8976103
>floor(x-1) +1 <= x, which implies floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x)
what did he mean by this?

>>8976451
floor(x) is the greatest integer less than x, so since floor(x-1)+1 is an integer and floor(x-1)+1<=x then we must have floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x)

>>8976452
if you're going to use such reasoning you can just use the original statement and the definition of the floor function, you don't need the retarded fluff in >>8976103, and the reasoning in >>8976103 is dogshit retarded because given y(x)<=x and y(x-1) +1 <= x, there is no implication of y(x-1)+1 <= y(x), >>8976103 doesn't prove anything in and of itself, it's just a convoluted way to say that the original statement is true.

>>8976459
>because given y(x)<=x and y(x-1) +1 <= x, there is no implication of y(x-1)+1 <= y(x)
what are you talking about? reread >>8976452

>>8976462
what are you talking about? reread >>8976103 >>8976459

>>8976465
I did read it, you said floor(x-1)+1<=x doesn't imply floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x) but I gave the details right here >>8976452

If floor(x-1)+1<=x doesn't imply floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x) then explain why.

>>8976466
kill yourself you shitty troll

>>8976103
>since floor(x)<=x we have floor(x)-1<= x-1, which gives floor(x)-1 <= floor(x-1)
>similarly floor(x-1) <= x-1, so floor(x-1) +1 <= x, which implies floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x)
this in and of itself doesn't imply floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x), you have to bring in additional reasoning like in >>8976452, and with such reasoning you don't need the retarded babbling in >>8976103

a proof isn't better just because you spewed a load of verbal diarrhea about a statement that is obvious in the first place

>>8976467
>this in and of itself doesn't imply floor(x-1)+1 <= floor(x), you have to bring in additional reasoning like in >>8976452 (You)
I didn't feel the need to provide every little detail, I'm not handing this in for grading. When someone writes 'the modularity theorem implies Fermat's Last Theorem', people don't cry about them not including additional reasoning.

>and with such reasoning you don't need the retarded babbling in >>8976103 (You)
Then apply such reasoning to do it without the ""babbling"". I don't see you actually providing any alternative proof.

>>8976472
>a proof isn't better just because you spewed a load of verbal diarrhea about a statement that is obvious in the first place
'statement is obvious' is not a proof. Again, I would give you a 0 if this was what you wrote on an exam.

Try again.

>>8976474
>I would give you a 0 if this was what you wrote on an exam.
/care

>>8976474
>Try again.
no. this is your last (You) you infantile sperglord troll.

>>8976478
>no. this is your last (You) you infantile sperglord troll.
So still no alternative proof? I'm not surprised.

When something says 'Prove the following statement', answering with 'it's obvious' gets you a 0.

Take a few upper level math classes before spouting off nonsense.

>mfw debunking the arguments of brainlets left and right in this thread
It's truly too easy, why do brainlets even start when they just plan on running away once they're exposed? You look like a fool regardless

File: fidget-spinner-black.jpg (97KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1000x1000px

>>8969578
why is there a force when I turn my fidget spinner around, is it the same reason why spinning object are more stabile?

>>8976493
Thats called torque

File: Untitled.png (5KB, 621x100px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 621x100px

deluded stupid cuck

>>8976493
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroscope

>>8976498
Just because you take a screenshot of something doesn't make it an argument.

floor(x) is not defined to be floor(x+n)-n, floor(x) is defined to be the greatest integer less than or equal to x.

Try again.

using the definition of the floor function,

floor(-1) = -1

floor(x - 1) + 1 = floor(x)

floor(x - 1) = floor(x) - 1

(You) lose

kill yourself btw fucking mentally ill retard i'm not even going to post in this thread because you're done wasting my time

>>8976505
>floor(x - 1) + 1 = floor(x)
Does not follow from floor(-1) = -1. You've used zero (0) properties of the floor function here except for it's definition at -1.

Consider the function g(x)=x^2-2. This satisfies g(-1) = -1, but we don't have g(x-1)+1= g(x) since g(x-1)+1=(x-1)^2-2+1=x^2-2x != x^2-2 = g(x)

Try again brainlet.

You're just trolling and don't seriously believe this is a proof right? I'd hate to see your homework grades.

>>8976506
Yet another intellectual checkmate.

>>8976511
>using the definition of the floor function,

>>8976525
>yet another post completely devoid of argument, meaning or substance

Try.

Again.

(if you dare)

File: Bait.png (114KB, 955x957px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 955x957px

floor(x) = x - frac(x)
floor(x - 1) = x - 1 - frac(x - 1) = x - 1 - frac(x) = floor(x) - 1
QED and KYS

Why is it called number theory instead of integer theory?

>>8976538
>purposely introduces the frac function to avoid making a sound and valid proof, hiding the "hard work" of the proof in the unproven equality frac(x-1)=frac(x)
LOL

It just gets better and better!

Please keep it up, if the department ever shafts me into teaching some horrible 'intro to proofs' class for brainlets like you I can keep these posts to teach the students what NOT to do

It's a three line proof my friend, just look:
>>8976103

>>8976546
Number theorists study more than the integers, for example algebraic number fields which are finite field extensions of the rational numbers, or Dirichlet series which are complex functions

>>8976548
frac(x) = x - floor(x) = x mod 1

>>8976553
Yes that's an equality you've written down.

Now why is it true?

>>8976136
>i'm not an academic, but whatever helps you cope :)

>>8976548
>Please keep it up, if the department ever shafts me into teaching some horrible 'intro to proofs' class for brainlets like you I can keep these posts to teach the students what NOT to do

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>8976557
It's obvious. Proving frac(x) = frac(x - 1) has no relevance here.

>>8975159
Why can't there be fractional quarks.

>>8976579
There are, up quarks have like a 2/3 spin and down have a -1/3 spin or something.

>>8976561
>implying me LARPing has anything to do with your faulty "proofs".
Try again my friend.

>>8976566
It does have relevance since the entire proof in >>8976538 hinges on it and it's used without justification.

Frac is DEFINED in terms of floor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_wave):
>frac(x) := x - floor(x)

So how would one know if frac(x-1)=frac(x)? This requires x-1 - floor (x-1) = x - floor (x), or equivalently floor(x-1) = floor(x) -1, which is what we're trying to show. Hence this is an invalid circular argument.

There's work to be done in proving floor(x-1)= floor(x)-1, it's not hard as shown here:
>>8976103
but it's not immediate.

>>8976585
>mental illness: the post

>>8976590
>still coping with faulty proofs: the post

>>8976581
I asked about fractional quarks not quarks with fractional spin.

>>8976585
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_wave
>or x(t) = t(mod 1)
KILL YOURSELF

>>8976594
But a quark is its spin.

>>8976594
See the Standard Model

>>8976599
>>8976597
So why can't there be fractional protons again?

>>8976607
If what I'm asking is still unclear: if a proton is 3 quarks and something that is less than a quark exists (a fraction of a quark), then 3 fractional quarks can add up to a fractional proton. So why don't they?

>>8976596
>or x(t) = t(mod 1)
You're not serious right?

You don't even know the definition of mod is in terms of floor?

Please tell me what school for brainlets you went to so I know to stay far away from such a lowly mathematical culture.

What part of this don't you get?

There is such a minimal amount of work to be done in this proof and you're too intellectually stunted to do even the slightest bit of work, it's truly remarkable.

All your puny mind seems to be able to handle is circular arguments.

>>8976597
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)
Doesn't seem like it.

>>8976611
kill yourself

kill yourself

kill yourself

>>8976620
>kill yourself
does not imply floor(x)-1=floor(x-1)

>kill yourself
does not imply floor(x)-1=floor(x-1)

>kill yourself
does not imply floor(x)-1=floor(x-1)

>>8976621
you're so mentally crippled that you think you made up problem even matters at all outside of your dunning kruger sperglord mind

you're a pathetic joke

>>8976627
>made up problem
???
see
>>8976065

>>8976627
>dunning kruger
LOL

If I wanted to dunning kruger I would be acting much differently than just being able to do a borderline trivial proof involving floor functions that somehow boggles your mind.

you're truly a vile creature

you have the capacity to understand class widths but you refuse to admit that you were mistaken

>>8976609
Fractions of quarks don't exist

I need a good book about computational fluid dynamics.
Any recommendations?

>>8976632
>changes the subject to ANOTHER subject his incorrect views have been debunked on
How far do you take this delusion my man?

>>8976621
>floor(x)-1=floor(x-1)
But this is true. Proof:

I. [math] x \in \mathbb{Z} [/math]
[math] x \in \mathbb{Z} \Rightarrow \floor{x} = x (1) [/math]
[math] x \in \mathbb{Z} \Rightarrow x - 1 \in \mathbb{Z} (2) [/math]
[math] (1) & (2) \Rightarrow \floor{x - 1} = x - 1 = \floor{x} - 1 [/math]

II. [math] x \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Z} [/math]
[math] x \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Z} \Rightarrow \exists! { \epsilon }_x \in (0,1), x = \floor{x} + { \epsilon }_x (a) [/math]
[math] By (2) x - 1 = \floor{x} + { \epsilon }_x - 1 =
\floor{x - 1} + { \epsilon }_x \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Z} (b) [/math]
[math] (a)&(b) \Rightarrow \floor{x - 1} = \floor{x} - 1 [/math]

>>8976652
The fuck? Test: [math] \floor{ x } \floor{ x - 1 } [/math]

>>8976655
It's lfloor and rfloor.

>>8976656
New test with \floor* [math] \floor*{ x } [/math]

File: 2qNqF2Y.png (29KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x480px

>>8976652

>>8976660
Apart from the botched tex, everything there is true.

[math] \DeclarePairedDelimiter\floor{\lfloor}{\rfloor}
\floor*{ x } [/math]

motherfucker if this doesn't work........

>>8976665
why do you keep using so many tags it's just lfloor and rfloor:

[math] \lfloor x \rfloor [/math]

Also there's a tex sandbox pic related

>>8976666
Because I don't want to write \lfloor and \rfloor every time I need to write a a floor function. Fucking 4chan and its shit tex parser.

>>8976652
Let me simplify that for you.
[math] x \in \mathbb{R} \implies \exists! \ { \epsilon }_x \in [0,1)\ ,\ x=\lfloor x \rfloor +\ {\epsilon}_x [/math]
[math] \lfloor x-1 \rfloor = \lfloor \lfloor x \rfloor \ +\ {\epsilon}_x - 1\rfloor = \lfloor x \rfloor\ +\ 0\ - 1 = \lfloor x \rfloor - 1 [/math]

File: sip.gif (2MB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x540px

>>8976682
Lmao, [math] \lfloor a+b \rfloor \neq \lfloor a \rfloor + \lfloor b \rfloor [/math]
Proof: Set [math] a = b = \frac{1}{2} [/math]

>>8976691
?

>>8976694
You have to proove that [math] \lfloor\lfloor x \rfloor + \epsilon - 1 \rfloor = \lfloor x \rfloor + \lfloor {\epsilon} \rfloor - \lfloor 1 \rfloor [/math]

>>8976699
How about this
[math] x\in\mathbb{R}\implies\exists!{\epsilon}_x\in[0,1)\ \ \text{s.t.}\ \ x=\lfloor x\rfloor+{\epsilon}_x
[/math]
[math]\implies\lfloor x-1\rfloor=\lfloor\lfloor x\rfloor+{\epsilon}_x-1\rfloor=\lfloor\lfloor\lfloor x\rfloor -1\rfloor +{\epsilon}_x\rfloor=\lfloor\lfloor x\rfloor -1\rfloor=\lfloor x\rfloor -1 [/math]

>>8976699
it's pretty fuckin obvious tho

>>8976803
Prove it.

>>8976774
This is correct.
It's also essentially identical to the proof in >>8976652 the only differences being that you omit different steps.

>>8976820
your mom

>>8976836
You mad.

I'm working on Angular & Linear speed of a circle atm. I've noticed I'm absolutely terrible at unit conversion. how do i improve this

>>8977074
Drills.
By which I mean trepanation.