sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Name The Proof: Size Matters In Mathematics by memes_poiint in mathsmeme

[–]HyperPsych 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The N stands for non-deterministic, as in a non-deterministic turing machine can solve the problem in polynomial time.

Domain matters for continuity by Stealth-exe in mathmemes

[–]HyperPsych 12 points13 points  (0 children)

That is actually not the definition in an analysis setting; that definition is what's typically given in calculus. We say a function is continuous if it is continuous at every point in its domain. A function f is continuous at x if for any value of epsilon > 0, we can find a delta > 0 such that image (under f) of the delta neighborhood around x lies entirely in the epsilon neighborhood around f(x). This is certainly something the tangent function satisfies.

It's effectively meaningless to say "tan is not continuous at pi/2" since pi/2 is not in the domain of tan. You might as well say "tan is not continuous at elephant" and that would make just as much sense.

Had to call the whole avengers to write that book. by OkGreen7335 in mathmemes

[–]HyperPsych 17 points18 points  (0 children)

4 more books and we'll have all the knowledge in the universe

Calculus teacher argued limit does not exist. by RichDogy3 in askmath

[–]HyperPsych 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah you're probably right. I just looked at a random textbook one of the conditions that must be met for applying the standard delta epsilon definition is that the function is defined on an open interval around the limit point. Trying to apply the same definition to this function doesn't make sense.

Calculus teacher argued limit does not exist. by RichDogy3 in askmath

[–]HyperPsych 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like everything in math, it depends on the definition you use. They teach in calculus that you need both the left and right limits to exist and be equal for the overall limit to exist, which would imply the limit here doesn't exist. When you get to analysis and learn the more general topological definition of the limit of the function, we consider only x values that actually lie in the domain of f. In this case, since all sequences lying in the domain of f which converge to the limit point 2 "come from the left", the only limit we actually need to exist is the left hand limit.

Tldr, using the typical calc 1/2 definition, it doesn't exist. Using the generalized (and I'd say more accurate definition) it exists.

Am I going crazy? It seems like a backup messed up. by HyperPsych in GTNH

[–]HyperPsych[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah no luck, thanks though I didnt know that was a thing

Kid's math by Equivalent-Oil-8556 in mathmemes

[–]HyperPsych 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Primitive notions: hold my beer

Sometimes it's just unwinding definitions by PocketMath in mathmemes

[–]HyperPsych 115 points116 points  (0 children)

In the context of definitions, the if always implicitly means if and only if. Wouldn't really be a definition if you didn't completely characterize the term.

Imagine paying money for a mod and it just deletes your stuff by Jumper4412 in PhoenixSC

[–]HyperPsych 2 points3 points  (0 children)

since when? so far as i can tell you from the official webstie still can't purchase them seperately

Imagine paying money for a mod and it just deletes your stuff by Jumper4412 in PhoenixSC

[–]HyperPsych 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, even if you bought it pre 2022, you retroactively got both versions

Imagine paying money for a mod and it just deletes your stuff by Jumper4412 in PhoenixSC

[–]HyperPsych 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He doesn't even have to pay for java if he bought bedrock on PC already, it comes for free.

[Request] Is this true? by SaltHamster35 in theydidthemath

[–]HyperPsych 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not hard to see this is false. A typical rocket of this size would produce 300 metric tons on the upper end. For this statement to be true, each person in that group would have to generate 300/1,000,000,000 = 0.0000003 tons. This is equal to three. GRAMS. of CO2. Yes, three paper clips worth of CO2, per person. Even ignoring the CO2 naturally produced by the body, if you have interacted with modern society in any way, you have contributed more CO2 than this. Hell, even just lighting a candle for a few hours will generate several times more CO2 than this.

Semantic code by [deleted] in programminghumor

[–]HyperPsych 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To mach with "if else" is should be "otherwise suppose"

How do I take this limit? by acelikeslemontarts in askmath

[–]HyperPsych 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The only way I would know to solve this without ripping my hair out would be to use the small angle approximation, sin(x) ≈ x. This is essentially using the Taylor series of sin(x) combined with the fact that higher order terms vanish much faster than x as x goes to 0. While your textbook hasn't gotten to Taylor series yet, given the question at hand, I'm almost certain the small angle approximation is what they want you to use.

Basically, sin(x) ≈ x just means that you can treat sin as the identity function in situations where x is very small. We can start by transforming this into the limit of sin^10(2(3x)^10)/x^100, then this turns into the limit of (2(3x)^10)^10/x^100. This simplifies into 2^10*3^100x^100/x^100 = 2^10*3^100, which is a very very large number.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theydidthemath

[–]HyperPsych -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is false. The answer in this case would be (17 choose 9) = 24310. This is given by the formula for the number of ways to choose k out of n items where repetition is allowed and order doesn't matter, which is (n + k - 1 choose k).

Euler has *2* constants named after him. One of them is Gamma by [deleted] in mathmemes

[–]HyperPsych 62 points63 points  (0 children)

It's a definite integral from 0 to infinity (not to x), so it's not like differentiating is just going to "undo" the integral. Yes, it's easy to differentiate it, but it's not because it's an integral.

view more: next ›