Hey /sci/. A level maths student here struggling with part 2 of this question, could someone give me a hand
>>8472648
Take [math]\ln[/math] of both sides.
[math] y = \frac{1}{2}(ln(1+sinx))[/math]
[math]\frac{dy}{dx}= \frac{1}{2}cos(x)*\frac{1}{1+sinx}[/math]
>>8472655
I tried that, and then rearranged for y=ln(1+sinx)/2. Differentiating this to find the same answer as part 1nis where im struggling
Post books for learning/educating yourself about math or other subjects, and we rate them.
Also, is pic related any good?
>>8472633
That is just a joke version of this one. The books are good but many of them are graduate level.
Also, this.
And this.
So lets say that we have two infinitely strong magnets and the crane as well as the car were made of indestructible materials. Would you be infinitely propelled or would the car phase out of space and time.
>>8472605
yes
rupert and hyde
If I close my eyes the crane will act as a wave because it's not being observed, and will be propelled infinitely out of space and time.
What is it /sci/
-1/12
>>8472598
That expression is at a superposition. Please collapse the wavefunction by adding the missing parenthesis in either place.
the conjecture is false.
how does ((sqrt3)-1)/((sqrt3)+1) = 2-sqrt3 ?
multiply the top and bottom by sqrt(3)-1
kill the denominator by multiplying with 1 and remembering the binomial formula
>>8472506
[eqn]\frac{\sqrt{3} - 1}{\sqrt{3} + 1} = \frac{\sqrt{3} - 1}{\sqrt{3} + 1} \frac{\sqrt{3} - 1}{\sqrt{3} - 1} = \frac{(\sqrt{3} - 1)^2}{3 - 1} = \frac{3 + 1 - 2 \sqrt{3}}{2} = 2 - \sqrt{3}[/eqn]
Is it possible to map each point on a hypercube onto a simple plane? So that each unique point on the 4d cube has a unique point on the plane, and has the same neighboring points as it would on the hypercube? Except the edges of the plane obviously. Is it possible? If so, what would that look like?
>>8472462
>on a hypercube
How do you define a point being "on" a hypercube?
>>8472469
On the surface of it. Like if you unfold a 3d cube, you get this. What would you get with a hypercube if you unfold it into 2d, and is that even possible without losing any surfaces?
>>8472475
If you unfold a 3d cube, you get 2d cubes (squares). If you unfold a 4d cube, you get 3d cubes. So in this sense, it's impossible what you're asking for.
How do people learn subjects so quickly? I'm pushing my way through Khan Academy, but I just wish I could progress faster. I have been stuck at the 25-27% mark on the algebra model for a while now. I've looked up a list of the properties present in algebra, and I'm making note cards in an attempt to memorize the mechanics that make it up better.
However, I have a feeling that I will just be the person in math that just memorizes everything instead of completely understanding it.
Is there any hope for a brainlet like me? :(
>>8472454
Not really. Brainletacademy will not teach you why addition is commutative or associative.
No one who does not study pure math even knows why it is that way. Everyone just memorizes it.
Engys and physicsfags here who talk about 'intuition' are talking out of their ass because they just memorized shit. Ask one of those faggots to prove commutativity of addition of constructive reals and they will give you a blank stare.
Don't swallow the intuition meme. No one knows the 'why' of even the most basic mathematics until they know set theory and formal logic.
>>8472454
You don't learn math by memorization. So, your biggest problem is that you're treating it like it's a history class.
Understand the intuition behind the concepts, and understand why problems are solved the way they are.
By memorizing only certain paths you can take to solve a problem, if the problem doesn't immediately make it clear that it can be solved by taking a similar path, you will struggle with solving it. You'd be doing yourself a favor by looking at problems more openly like "what is this question asking, what is the meaning of the solution, and how does that meaning follow from the question" rather than, "well what method that I've previously done can I apply here."
I didn't understand trig for shit until I understand how it relates to the circle, and now it comes second nature to me.
>>8472472
Book suggestions to understand why?
Men arent supposed to overdose on estrogen and estradiol. Any steroid is a bad steroid.
>>8472323
Don't worry Trump will fix this. By removing all the regulations on endocrine disrupting chemicals in plastics to give people jobs we will all become gay.
>>8472376
Just don't use plastics
>>8472319
Good thing i never got a flu shot.
No.
Why are Americans so afraid of needles in themselves when they do this to animals for food?
When you think of a memory where you thought you were right and realize looking back on it with your current state of mind and self that you were wrong? Well, everyone experiences that in their own way on a topic of life and every realization then turns into someone's truth, therefore each of their truths on a topic is a universe within itself ( universe: a particular sphere of activity, interest, or experience). This also is shown by the fact that everyone sees things differently or notices different things depending on their experiences and/or truths; but they can still communicate with you and build the world or a relationship with you. And I supposed the moment when all of intellectual life (or just human beings) realizes or agrees on one thing that is where all universes are in sync. I wonder what being in that universe would fee like.
You stupid thats wrong
>>8472307
I know you are but what am i
You are rude
What are some good alternatives to /sci/ where actual discussion takes place instead of shitposting, memeflinging?
Is there a place for semi-casual science discussion without /pol/ and high-schoolers shitting up the place? Or does the lack of rigour in such a place inevitably attract those types?
>>8472250
You could start by not posting pepe the fucking frog. If you don't have the ability to start a thread with a math/science related topic yourself you have no right to complain. I'm sick of sci too but at least I keep it to myself.
https://twitter.com/ladyattis
My twitter page.
>>8472250
/r/askscience is high quality if you can tolerate the redditors (less obnoxious than poltards imo)
Why do you guys's need math when you have a calculator?
>>8472019
>babby still does babby math
>babby hasn't realized math isn't about numerical approximations
>>8472025
>babby hasn't realized math isn't about numerical approximations
>he thinks it isn't
This is what math majors ACTUALLY BELIEVE
>>8472019
>using a calculator
>can't do multi-variable calc in his head
Will a PhD in organic chemistry make me able to synthesize LSD or DMT?
>>8472003
you don't PhD in ochem to do that
>>8472008
shhh, don't crush his little dreams, let this fucking hopeless moron have something to cling to
>>8472003
You can do that with a PhD in Gender and Fat studies.
So since all of the US election fallout I've been hearing a lot of people and purported experts espouse notions that implicit bias against women, minorities, etc. played a large role in the election result.
As someone with a B.Sci in Biology, and an interest in neurobiology and genetics, I'm curious as to the actual validity of these claims. IIRC, many of these purported researchers use tools like "Implicit Bias Tests" as evidence to support their conclusion, but I don't see how this can be considered valid. I myself have taken 2 of these tests; one for racial bias, and one for sexual orientation bias. Anecdotally, as someone who is politically independent, and a white bisexual male who has, thus far, only dated other non-black men (I'd chalk that up to chance, not bias), the test prompts concluded that I preferred blacks and straight people. How can these tests be measuring "bias" when they could simply be measuring my speed/accuracy in correcting recently memorized associations when assigning descriptors to categories? Does your handedness factor into it (the test directs you to use keys operated by each hand)? The claims that these tests actually measure implicit bias towards demographic groups seems more like political ideology than science. Could you not make people take associative bias tests for categories that are truly neutral (like shapes for example) and rationalize it with the same conclusion that I prefer squares to triangles?
The only other research I am aware is a study showing infants prefer adults of the same skin color, but even then, this strikes me as something that can't necessarily be extrapolated to adults.
>B.S in biology
>>>/x/
bias studies are for lib-arts faggots who can't into real science so they default to 'muh statistics
>>8472020
Well memed anon.
>>8472028
Well yeah, that's what I'm coming to realize. But I guess I'm wondering if there are any further neuroscience studies, maybe even brain scans, anything more empirical than simply this test? Are there any better studies out there? Because this is what I see presented most often as evidence for implicit bias by a lot of "social science academics" these days.
Is anyone on /sci/ going to a uni doing some groundbreaking research?
Tell us about it.
Also /uni/ general I guess.
I have just written a paper solving the Goldbach Conjecture and it's about to be peer-reviewed by some hypergenius mathematician. I might be about to get rich and famous.
>>8471941
>groundbreaking research?
lel, I'm just trying to put the pieces of my personal life together for long enough to finally graduate
I could be doing some really interesting research if I didn't have to work while studying or if I didn't have to hurry up because I lost 2 years of my life due to health issues.
>>8471941
I'm doing research on improving one of the most commonly used vaccines in the world.