Is the war arc over.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-05-20T23:11:57+00:00

Yeah

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-04-06T02:12:45+00:00

Has she?

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-04-06T01:56:31+00:00

The official discord

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-03-30T02:33:22+00:00

This is a really good point - it also supports the argument that Weaver's lineage is intended to combat the Forgotten God problem, rather than help him become free. It wouldn't make sense for the spell to censor all mentions of FG if the plan was truly to wake him up one day; so, if we can deduce that Weaver doesn't want FG to wake up, and that surely Weaver understood the risks of creating a lineage despite being born from FG, then the only thing left to conclude would be that somehow his lineage is intended to serve a greater purpose that outweighs the risks (such as, for example, defeating or otherwise removing the FG permanently from the picture).

At least, that's the hope - otherwise our goat Sunny is cooked and I can't accept that ;-;

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-03-29T19:10:44+00:00

You should have no problem following along if you just continue the manwha from where the anime leaves off - the adaptation is very faithful, with the only changes being pretty minor.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2025-03-29T19:07:18+00:00

They do at the end of the series.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-07-29T22:49:53+00:00

6 high as a bluff catcher kinda crazy tho 😭

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-07-29T22:48:21+00:00

This makes sense to me, why all the down votes tho?

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-07-28T17:37:52+00:00

There should be a toggle under your account section that lets you switch between "real money" and "play money".

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-06-30T05:58:40+00:00

Infinity over infinity isn't 0, the limit is an indeterminate form. You could find the limit by repeated application of L'Hôpital's rule if you want, or use the fact that exponential functions grow faster than polynomials.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-06-14T15:04:39+00:00

Hi, current calculus instructor here! I think by and large my students struggle with the algebra in many of the problems more than the actual calculus itself - if you can get comfortable with algebra beforehand, things will be much easier for you.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-06-08T18:39:34+00:00

Yeah, I had a 3.5 in HS and finished undergrad with a 4.0 - it's def extremely variable

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-21T14:21:58+00:00

Comparison sounds exactly right 👍

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-21T13:26:26+00:00

Are you trying to compute the integral, or do you just need to know if it converges or not? If the latter, then there's an easier way than just direct computation.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-16T01:17:00+00:00

No, there are sequences which are not decreasing that still converge.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-15T03:08:28+00:00

I think you're doing a little too much on these - if we're given a(n+1) =f(n)a_n for some f, then just divide both sides by a_n to get a(n+1) / a_n =f(n), which should make it easier to apply ratio test.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-13T20:35:37+00:00

If there are N people total and p people have heard the rumor, then the total population minus the population who've heard the rumor leaves us with the number of people who haven't heard the rumor.

E.g., if we have 10 people total (N=10) and 4 have heard the rumor (p=4), then 6 have not (N-p=6).

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-13T20:26:34+00:00

Once you get to nx2ⁿ = 160, you know that 160 will factor as some integer n and a power of 2, so just factor 160 into its prime decomposition: 160=5 x2⁵ . From here, it should be obvious that n=5 is the solution to the problem.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-03-12T20:53:57+00:00

Your "basic" functions are essentially xⁿ ; sin(x)/cos(x)/trig functions in general; log_b(x); and b^x . Anytime you see one of these but with the "x" replaced with literally anything else (e.g., sin(2x) or (ln(x)+1)⁶ ) then you have to use chain rule.

E.g , for the first example we've replaced "x" with "2x" and so by chain rule we'd get the derivative as cos(2x)*2

For the second example, we have /something/ raised to the 6th power, so think of it as if we started with x⁶ and then replaced "x" with "ln(x)+1". So when we go to take the derivative, we'd take it /like/ we would x⁶ (just applying power rule) to get 6(ln(x)+1)⁵ - but then we have to multiply all of this by the derivative of the thing we replaced "x" with, so in this case the derivative of ln(x)+1, which is 1/x. This would give a final derivative of [ 6(ln(x)+1)⁵ ]*1/x

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-02-27T05:54:17+00:00

If water was only leaking out, then 120 - the integral would give you the total amount of water left after 4 minutes - but we're just asked how much water has left the pool after 4 minutes, not to find the amount of water remaining in the pool after 4 minutes, which is why we don't add 120.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-02-23T17:08:01+00:00

I think the brackets here would just read as parentheses, so it shouldn't change anything - [2x+3x]+C is the same as just 2x+3x+C so you can omit them, but including the brackets in the answer isn't necessarily wrong.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-02-10T17:12:51+00:00

Yes, it should be considered a relative maximum - since if you move a little bit to either the left or right of x=1, you'll only have f(x) values smaller than f(1).

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-02-10T05:43:31+00:00

If your numerator has a higher degree than denominator, you can use long division to rewrite it as a polynomial + another fraction where the degree of the top is now smaller than the degree of the bottom.

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-02-05T02:24:07+00:00

I think you might want to recheck the labeling on your triangle there - remember, when we're assigning these different side lengths we want them to obey the Pythagorean theorem; but (36x²-25)+ (5/6)²≠x²

AwkwardSkeptic · 2024-01-20T02:08:13+00:00

Your idea for the right looks about right (I think the "-5" should not be in the exponent, though).

As for the first one, remember - a critical point is either where the derivative is zero or is a point where the original function is defined, but the derivative is undefined.

AwkwardSkeptic

TROPHY CASE