>tfw you use [eqn]log_e(x)[/eqn] instead of [eqn]ln(x)[/eqn].

>>8393709
> doing physics labs
> results do work so I make them up

>>8393709
I use i instead of j in EE

>>8393715
I use i instead of j when working with quaternions

>>8393732
Woops
>>8393716

>>8393716
2nd year EE student here.
My complex analysis professor insists that everyone use i instead of j. He's a fucking CUNT and you are too

I name derivatives of a function as different variables when solving ODE
>y' = g
>y'' = h

>>8393709
I always use C when collaborating on academic software and I make liberal use of inline assembly. But the secret is I don't write the asm, I just have my compiler generate it and then inline it in my source code and delete the part I'm inlining.

>>8393741
No, you're a fucking cunt and should kill yourself asap.

I integrate with respect to c and use x as my constant

I exclude the positive real line in my complex logarithm's argument

>>8393709

I use 3b1b's triangle of power notation

I use -lnx instead of s when using the laplace transform.

File: 1474306049908.jpg (47KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 499x499px

>>8393709
>Homework due tomorrow
>Beg for extension
>Actually finished it a week ago

I complicate my working out :^)

eg:

[eqn]\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\int_{(\log_ek)^k-e^{k!}}^{\sum_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\frac{1}{n} }\left(1-\frac{c^2}{x}\right)^{x} \mathrm{d}c =\left(\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{99^2}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(4k)!}{k!^4}\frac{26390k+1103}{396^{4k}}\right)^{-1}[/eqn]

>>8393870
I only use power series representations for all functions

>>8393709
>Physics 1A: Introduction to Newtonian Mechanics
>turn in my homework using Lagrangian formalism on every problem

>>8393905
>doing coin sliding on ramp problem
>account relativistic effects

>>8393905

That's a good way to get an F

>>8393901
FUCK YOU

>>8393918
the professor is amused so far, said it seemed rather overkill but that I was doing it correctly

>>8393709
i liek this meme.

>>8393741
The symbol for 1 is 1, you don't go and write some other number like 2 and call it 1.

The same way with i, i is the symbol for the imaginary unit, while j is the symbol for another type of unit.

>>8393713
See you on retractionwatch shitlord

>>8393905
>>8393916
got me a bit of a chuckle desu

>>8393901
Retard. That only works for analytic functions.

>>8393807
But why

>>8393807
that's not unconventional, that's just retarded

I only ever state the Chinese remainder theorem as the following statement:
Consider the metric like function d on an algebra in which congruences commute. d maps pairs of elements to the least congruence associating them.
In this sort-of metric space, any closed balls that are close enough to intersect do intersect.
And that's the CRT :^)

I show all the steps in my work.

ALL OF IT, including explanations and descriptions of everything. my prof probably hates checking my long ass assignments.

>>8394788
kek

>>8394788
>x^2 + 5x = - 10
>x^2 +5x +10 = 0
>Hey Prof, how are you? Enjoying that 300K? Anyway, what I've done here is adding 10 to rearrange and form a quadratic of the form f(x) =0. Can you see that? I'm pretty sure I can solve this quadratic. Just so you know , the x's are variables that can take on any number, and 5 and 2 are real numbers. I've been watching this guy on YouTube who's made me a bit disenfranchised with the real numbers if I'm honest. Nonetheless, I'll use them since there's no better option. You know, I'm not actually sure if I can solve this quadratic. Hmm. Tune into the next page for derivation of the quadratic formula from Euclidean axioms.

>>8394970

I obviously don't write the third one, but some times I get very try hard and put words like "then.." "since..." . definitions and some times some additional notes like "N is such and such"

File: 1470568882004.jpg (10KB, 205x205px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 205x205px

>>8393709
I write [math]\forall x P(x)[/math] and leave the domain implicit based on what kind of variable [math]x[/math] is.

>>8394981
That doesn't sound try hard at all but just how it should be done.

>>8393713
Haha holyshit I fake some too.
Glad I'm not the only one

File: IMG_2631.jpg (40KB, 300x250px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 300x250px

>so let's use the Laplace transform here...
>mfw I didn't check whether the function is locally integrable on [0, infty]

;)))))))

>>8394981

well seeing as many people don't bother to do it, or don't know.

>>8393709
>tfw you use [math]ln(X)[/math] instead of [math]\mathrm{ln}(x)[/math].

>>8395059
The functions you use are probably continuous on R so whoever grades you is somehow convinced you are not retarded and thought it trivial.

> need variables
> use b, [math]b,~ B,~ \beta[/math], cursive b etc

[math]\text{I treat}\ \frac{\mathrm{d}y}{\mathrm{d}x}\ \text{as a fraction.}[/math]

>>8395251
kek that's nothing, I label everything as x with a number subscript.
eg:

Define a function [math]x_1:x_2\rightarrow x_3,[/math] with [math]x_2[/math] being the natural numbers and [math]x_3[/math] the real numbers with [math]x_1(x_4)=x_5^{x_4}[/math], and [math]x_5\in x_7[/math], with [math]x_7[/math] the real numbers from [math]0[/math] to [math]1[/math] (not including [math]1[/math])

To show that [math]x_1[/math] converges to a limit [math]x_8[/math] as [math]x_4[/math] tends to infinity [denote [math]x_9[/math]], we must find [math]\forall x_{10} >0, \exists x_{11}>0[/math] such that if [math]x_{11}<x_4[/math], then [math]|x_1(x_4)-x_8|<x_{10}[/math], so that [math]\lim_{x_4\rightarrow x_9}x_1(x_4)=x_8.[/math]

>>8395838
kek that's nothing, I label everything as x with a number superscript.

>>8395838
I always hated this on linear algebra books.

>>8393709
I use [math] \mathbb{R}, \mathbb{Q}, \mathbb{Z}, \mathbb{R}[x], \mathbb{Q}(x,y), etc. [/math] as variable names.

>>8395444
i see what you did there bad boy

>>8395844
Jej than ain't shit , I label everything as x with a different coefficient

>>8394987
>leave the domain implicit
K I L L
I
L
L
Y O U R S E L F
O
U
R
S
E
L
F

Whenever I have to do an exam I leave proofs as an exercise to the marker

>>8394981
That's extremely standard when you get to higher level maths.

File: 1459655222929.jpg (68KB, 500x511px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x511px

>>8395947
kek

when i do derivatives i always take the limit of h instead of using rules.

>>8396264
yeah? well that's nothing

when i do integrals of continuous functions i calculate them through the upper and lower darboux integral sums

>>8396339
Kek
How do you do Lebesgue integrals, tough guy

>>8394970
>I've been watching this guy on YouTube who's made me a bit disenfranchised with the real numbers if I'm honest.
I chuckled

>>8394970
>>8395838
>>8395947
>>8393905
>>8393916
top fucking quality posts, kek

>>8394981
Sounds like good habits to me. Once stuff gets complicated it makes it easier to be in the habit of going through the logic on paper instead of only in your head.

File: 1442361174117.jpg (112KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 540x720px

I write f(t) = and then use x as variables in my equation

>>8396689
>the function f(x)

>>8396690
The joke's on you! f is a function mapping from the reals to the set of functions on the reals! So the function value f(x) is a function!

>>8393741
>2nd year EE
>doing actual complex analysis
Engineering mathematics should hardly be thought of as analysis, more like plug and chug.

>>8395838
You monster!

File: 1468426504220.jpg (20KB, 256x278px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 256x278px

>>8396538
Approximation with simple functions, clearly.

File: 1471743764298.jpg (13KB, 380x247px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 380x247px

I always put the general formula and never use ellipses. Ellipses are for heathens.