Post spooks

File: 6a00d8341bfda053ef00e54f5946818833-800wi.jpg (3KB, 208x104px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 208x104px

>>8900424

File: 1487475839483.png (13KB, 952x82px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 952x82px

>>8900424

>>8900625
That strikes me more as a floating point roundoff error than anything else

>>8900631
well you're wrong

>>8900632
Did you evaluate that nasty integral symbolically to check? Prove it.

>>8900645
http://schmid-werren.ch/hanspeter/publications/2014elemath.pdf

>>8900645
Everyday I go to sleep I feel as if the world is only getting worse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borwein_integral

>>8900631
>>8900645
nope its correct. just a product of infinity being weird

>>8900625
>>8900631
>>8900645
>>8900632
>>8900652
>>8900656
>what is mathematical induction taught in first semester of every single STEM programme

>>8900711
>saying mathematical induction but not even knowing what it is.
Nice post.

>>8900715
If you trust the "first few terms of a sequence" and extrapolate them towards infinity, you clearly dropped out in your second week you fucking teenager

>>8900732
want to know how i know you don't know shit about math?

>>8900711
>what is mathematical induction
ok, try and apply induction to that problem, ill wait.

>>8900658
it has nothing to do with "infinity being weird"

>Mathematician spook
For all consistent formalized system [math]F[/math] which contains Peano arithmetic, [math]F \,\not\vdash\, \mathrm{Cons} \,F[/math].

>Physicist spook
For all isolated system [math]\Sigma[/math], [math]\mathrm dS \,>\, 0\;\mathrm{J \,\cdot\, K^{-1}}[/math].

>Computer scientist spook
[eqn]\vdash\, P \,\vee\, \neg P[/eqn]

>Imageboard spook
[eqn]\rm {\color{red}A^{\displaystyle \color{yellow} u}}_{\displaystyle \color{green} t}{\color{cyan} i}^{\displaystyle \color{blue} s} \color{indigo} m[/eqn]

>>8900424
Oh shit

>>8900732
>still insulting people while not knowing what you're talking about.
dude stop. Just stop. Kys if you cant even be bothered to fucking google what you:re saying.

The integral of sinx from 0 to 2pi is 0.

The derivative of sinx is cosx.

Always found stuff like that too perfect and thus spooky.

>>8902565
>integral of sin x from 0 to pi is 2

that one spooked me out in high school

Finding the slope as delta x approached 0 and summing an infinite series of terms into a finite number spooked the shit out of me when I learned Calculus. I understood how it worked, and I did well and din't have any problems doing or understanding it, but to this day it spooks the shit out of me that its possible.

>>8902777
>mfw after taking an """applied""" complex analysis course (what engineers take) this just doesn't feel that special anymore

File: axiom-of-infinity.jpg (147KB, 850x308px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 850x308px

>>8900424

<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="block">
<msub>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<msup>
<mstyle mathcolor="red">
<mi mathvariant="normal">A</mi>
</mstyle>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0">
<mstyle mathcolor="yellow">
<mi mathvariant="normal">u</mi>
</mstyle>
</mstyle>
</mrow>
</msup>
</mrow>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0">
<mstyle mathcolor="green">
<mi mathvariant="normal">t</mi>
</mstyle>
</mstyle>
</mrow>
</msub>
<msup>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mstyle mathcolor="cyan">
<mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi>
</mstyle>
</mrow>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0">
<mstyle mathcolor="blue">
<mi mathvariant="normal">s</mi>
</mstyle>
</mstyle>
</mrow>
</msup>
<mstyle mathcolor="indigo">
<mi mathvariant="normal">m</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>

File: euler.png (384KB, 716x403px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 716x403px

>>8902336
>forgetting the original logician spook
[eqn]\left\{ x \middle| x \notin x \right}[/eqn]

>>8902781
The usual "proof" of the identity is presented as a syntactic trick that involves shuffling around the definitions of i, sin, cos and exp together with the oh-so-rigorous ... notation.
Which is really a shame because it downplays the geometric interpretation of the identity, from which the entire field of complex analysis pretty much follows.

File: embarrassing.png (134KB, 334x393px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 334x393px

>>8900732
>If you trust the "first few terms of a sequence" and extrapolate them towards infinity,
is this really what you think mathematical induction is?