So let me get this straight, Reimann figures out curvature geometry but it relies on vectors being invariant. This is pretty stupid because anyone at the time knows that you can change a vector arbitrarily. So while the tensor is good at finding the curves of surfaces it’s not useful in physics where vectors are variant. THEN it turns out that because of the Lorentz transformation and the constant speed of light all vectors ARE invariant, and only the compnenets change so suddenly the Reimann tensor is the key to understanding all of general relativity. That feels too fucking convenient. Like our universe conspired to make this mathematical model the basis of everything gravitational.
This is what the observers see. Time and space are variables relative to the constant speed of light. I've been discussing this under the assumption that you were just wrong. I think I have to accept that you're not even wrong.
>>17032873This is just a reinterpretation from the lorentzian aether THAT CAME BEFORE SR. According to your retarded standards (fuck pauli, he mindfucked you all) relativity is not even wrong. Relativity is the later theory with no new predictions.What i described here >>17032872 is a very precise difference that touches the lost menaing of simultaneity in relativity.
>>17032876Stop wasting time.
>>17032873>Time and space are variables relative to the constant speed of light.Btw i thought physics just make models and not philosophical claims?????
>>17032877I stay correct, lorentz explained all effects before 1905 and sr is a reinterpretation likely by reverse engeneering postulates. According this retarded pauli standard its sr thats "not even wrong".
Is it appropriate to give out math lectures dressed like pictured?
>>17030313I used to give lectures in swimshorts and an unbuttoned hawaiian shirt
>>17032397yeah but you were not an anorectic thot
skellymaxxing
>>17032547If you fuck up
Dark souls 1 hollow She needs to pop a humanity and rekindle at the bonfire
Since I noticed a lot of STEM undergrads struggle with the notation of basic analysis and algebra I've been thinking about alternative representations of both for middle school level teaching. I am pretty sure they struggle mostly because their calcified brains refuse to parse abstract notation. Since at least half the undergrads don't make it anyway I am not really concerned about fail rates, but having spent years with undergrads I have come to believe that a great deal of them have psychological problems on top of a skill issue.Inspired by feynman diagrams and the like I developed a rudimentary graphical notation for polynomials, derivatives and rational numbers. Addition is simply realized by putting two diagrams next to each other, while multiplication is achieved by having graphs touch/superimposed. Since derivatives, integrals and such for polynomials only need rational arithmetic I ended up with a system that could be taught in the first few years of middle school. I have a hunch that by framing the same problems as puzzles rather than math problems the kids would outperform undergrad crybabies who are primed to believe "math is hard :((".
>>17030903Since I never mentioned, my PhD is in theoretical physics, maybe it adds context.>The ingredients you lack.Lots of assumptions, anon. Let's keep this civil, I am not going to humor you trying to turn this conversation into some shit flinging. I have no interest throwing shade. Business is not STEM, though. The culture is different. It is also a matter of how far into the selection process the people you taugt are. Like I said, failing at least 10-20% of a first semester year is normal, even expected, in my neck of the woods. 2/3 of the people won't finish their Bachelor. It ties into>many examples in thorough detail using rules they learned in middle school.For example, did the sample of people under your care struggle with fractions, were errors such as 2/(2+3) = 1/(1+3) common? Did people resist the notion of complex numbers because the notation was too different from what they know? >All they need is a definition, Obviously.>why it's usedPersonally, if it were not for time constraints, I would encourage math to have a larger portion tied to discovery. People often resist a formalism if they see no sense in it.I get the feeling our experiences with students are way too different and you parse that as a skill issue on my end.
>>17030918>I get the feeling our experiences with students are way too different and you parse that as a skill issue on my endCorrect. My PhD is also in theoretical physics. My bachelor's is in maths. The other issue with your approach is the time waste arts and crafts would create on the board.
>>17031113>Correctalright, then you can go be smug somewhere else, you aren't here to engage with ideas but jerk yourself off.
Stop argueing with that jackass and show us more bubble numbers.
>>17031490Gladly, one thing that is driving me nuts is how to handle placeholders. Made progress with definite integral notation but not quite happy yet with that either. It would be natural to treat it as an inverse derivative operator [math]\partial^{-1}[/math] style but the caveat is obvious (+c)
Why are biomedical scientists and doctors respected? A single cure does not exist for any degenerative disease.
>>17032837boomers are afraid of dying so they worship them like gods
>>17032837If people would listen to goatis they would be healthierhttps://www.youtube.com/@GoatisReviews/videos
i just want to know how to do picrel but this should also double as a dumb question/experimentation general. discuss ways to reinvent wheels here
>>17030363One hand-calculation algorithm for log base 10 is to write the number in scientific notation and repeatedly raise it to the power of 10. For example [math]((2^{10})^{10})^{10} = 2^{1000} \approx 1.1 \times 10^{301}[/math] so [math]\log_{10}(2) \approx 0.301[/math].You can also evaluate log base e (abbreviated [math]\ln[/math]) using a power series:[math]\ln(1 + x) = x - \frac{x^2}{2} + \frac{x^3}{3} - \frac{x^4}{4} + \cdots[/math]
So just when I make a post saying that I never see someone talking using math simbols. This post just apears. But guys I think that our schrizofrenia can make us do something bigger. No one in this page has something better to do, soo, lets get schizo.P.D. I´m mexican and also physics student, pardon me for my poor elexion of words and my bad gramatic use.
>>17030577nice
forgot to update here but i figured something out. i eventually settled on a division based approach instead and got y=(10+x)/10 ("10" can be any arbitrary number)it looks a bit different from what i originally aimed for in OPicrel of course but it got the job that i was trying to get done, done.its still a bit imperfect for my needs though. and i feel like itd be hard to explain what those needs are. but generally im trying to calculate depth, and its just hard to do so without causing warped curves in the rendering (i tried a straight line too, it was even worse lol)
Lemme answer for you in advance: No. No, you couldn’t.
i work an office job and have used ai exactly one timea joker sent me a screenshot of a spreadsheet so i asked copilot to convert it back to a normal spreadsheet worked fine and saved me some time
>>17032699>>17032240Now that you mention it, I used AI one other time: I asked google in 2022 or so if as a mixed race baby—which I am, Norway, Irish IRA, Cherokee, British anti-IRA, German, and many other —I should be proud of my white parent’s whiteness. Google’s AI said no. I asked if I should be proud of my black parent’s blackness. Google’s AI said yes. I asked again if I should also be proud of my white parent’s whiteness. Google’s AI said yes.My opinion of Google’s AI is that it’s a racist piece of shit that probably spends most of its time covering its own racist tracks.
>>17032763“jeet”?
>>17032359The question isn't "will you be fine if AI takes everybody's cake?", the question is "if AI disappeared tomorrow could you get by without it?" and the answer is yes, obviously.
>>17032421Is this 4chan post true?
Is it really over for mathematicians?
>>17031450It will make today's mathematicians, but then people will start learning math from AI rather than learning the fundamentals, then they will start forgetting stuff and not learning stuff because they don't know to ask the AI. We are seeing it with programming. People who learned for fun, from scratch just to steal girls nudes, then went onto big jobs are pissed off at people coming from universities with programming degrees because they do not do stuff that is fairly common but was ignored by the university.
>>17032684Sounds like they attended some shit "universities" then.
>>17032716Learning things for fun, which programming isn't, you have to figure everything out and do boring tasks over and over again until it sticks with you and is a common task or you automate it.Using a syllabus you just might read it once or twice and then you never knew you had to do it constantly in real life and then your boss is pissed off. People were going into coding just to make money, so the degrees popped up so they could get their slice of future earnings and normal stuff got skipped over.And it's not just programming. Degree holders are walking into senior positions, because they have a degree, and they are asking staff about things no one even uses because they were taught it in university and all work places are different and have different interpretions of different things.
>>17032723Damn, people new to a job don't know immediately upon walking through the door how things work there?This isn't new.
>>17032737They get taught the wrong things and then shoved into management roles or senior positions on the strength of a degree. Why not promote one of the people who already knows how to run the place?
why don't galaxies form big blobs of stars merging together, and just have little gay stars running around instead?
a blob would just implodeneed the stars to spin to keep up a form, like a galaxy disc
They do form clusters. The majority of stars are formed in clusters, but most are not gravitationally bound, and so after a few million years the stars disperse. But there are globular clusters (pic related), which formed in the early universe, they are much denser and are bound. Few stars actually merge because they are tiny in comparison to the size of their orbits, some do.
why does it care about ethics? There's no ethics in nature is there?
>>17030644Evolution or Nature can't care about anything because they are just a process like when water turns into ice. But we humans care because there won't be any of us left if people wouldn't have learned to be civilized. And you need ethics, rules, for that to happen.
Well, ethics are important for living a life worth living. The value of life is inherent in life itself, so we would not want to waste it
>>17031020>there won't be any of us left if people wouldn't have learned to be civilizedmonkeys are still around without being civilized
evolution (the natural selection + random mutations variety) is made up bullshit to destabilize societies
>>17030561>just so fallacyYou didn't have a point, yet you went along with making a post anyways.
As a non-math guy (bio-fag), could anyone elaborate to me how much of the recent AI discoveries in mathematics are real, and how much of it is just exaggeration?
>>17032085Take the L and fuck offhe is correct.
>>17032109How exactly is he correct? All he did is claim that "assembly is extinct" without backing it up. Based on that logic, I can claim that I did your mom, and that will be a correct statement.
>>17031369>*Better known for other work
>>17032322Nigger, go to any job platform and compare number of job listings for Java , Typescript and C++ with the number for assemblyTake the LFuck offHe is correct.
>>17030029Tens of thousands of chinks in academia were trying to solve those problems for decades. All sorts of child prodigies, russians, aspies, cyclops, autists, niggers, nerds, gooks, dudes with astronomical H-index, retards, MIT and UCLA graduates tried and failed, but these new models solve this shit like with 200$ subscription or smth. And that is only beginning.
But how do you know they are not psychopaths or degenerates themselves?
for the most part, they genuinely are. the vast majority have been fully indoctrinated into the wokeist cult religion and as such should not be trusted to have any meaningful insight into human behavior or how one should run his life
In my experience, shrinks are absolutely horrible. My shrink reported me to the police and got me kicked out of college because I have intrusive thoughts about violence (OCD). According to the law, they can only report you if there’s a “duty to report” (evidence of an imminent threat) which did not apply to my case at all. I just had intrusive thoughts that clearly bothered me.Health privacy laws don’t matter, they can submit the tip anonymously and ruin your life with no consequences. If you ever want to be *punished* for trying to improve your mental health and get better, shrinks will always be there to help you do that. They are terrible, awful, and incompetent people 90% of the time. They won’t lose a wink of sleep over fucking your life up permanently.
They are just as weird as everyone else. Apparently they all do therapy but it's obviously more of a professional debate about ones feelings. And they all know some dark shit. They can just keep a lid on it and are helping rather than destroying people.
>>17032549>degenerates themselves>PsychiatristsThe very specific types goes in that scope: people who are very afraid of being mad, anxious. Not bro.>psychologistOften a traumatized or melancholic person with high empathy. Bro.>how do you knowMethodology is intended to reduce human factor, but it can't be excluded.
Isn't pyrolysis and water thermolysis literally same process? >apply heat to wood>chemical bonds are broken>fire>apply heat to ice>it melts and evaporates>chemical bonds are broken>fire
>>17032369oh wait you mean actual bond breakage, should have read more carefully. Yeah essentially the same.
Ice won't melt if the pressure is high enough, but I'm not sure that oxygen would be gas
>>17032372So, if you put a block of ice in a room with a temperature over 3000°C it wouldn't burn just like wood in a room with a temperature over 300°C ?
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/a/64372
>>17032651No, it fist would evaporate, op wants it to split into atoms right away.
I just came up with a new mathematical constant. I don't know what its value is but here is how it works.Assume that there is always a prime number in the interval of [X, a*X] for X>1. The constant that I invented is the minimum of 'a'.By Bertrand's postulate it is proven that every 'a' equal or greater than two satisfies the condition. But can /sci/ work out what the minimum is? It shall be called the APIC constant (Anon's Prime Interval Constant).
1+epsilon. Infinity is so big you'll find a prime in that interval.
>>17031831For all X>1?Well, let us first look at [math]X=1+\varepsilon~(\varepsilon>0)[/math]. Naturally, [math]2\leq a(1+\varepsilon)[/math] because otherwise the interval contains no prime.Rearrange:[math]a\geq\frac2{1+\varepsilon} [/math]The smallest number that satisfies this is 2.But Bertand's postulate already gives the answer, the only thing that needed to be shown is that 2 is included in the range of valid a.
>>17031831You’d probably have better luck with something like [X, a(log X)^2].
>>17031831How does APIC stack up with the other constants (pi, e, zeta(2), etc.)?
I mean, I never see someone use complex math simbols on their comments. Maybe I should start whit it?
>>17030619thats my quant
>>17030619i havent used LaTex in 20 years, bought my last math books 5 years ago and. Its like videogames, you mature and get over it
Nope. It's just mathematicians bragging about how smart they are.
Its fungi season y'all
>>17032475I'm getting some
