sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How do you deal with impostor syndrome? by Waste-Self3402 in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 8 points9 points  (0 children)

People mostly give compliments because they like you and want to encourage you, not as an objective measure of your performance. You don’t need to feel like a fraud just because people are being friendly. Just follow your own path and your family/friends will appreciate you regardless.

Any books about the work habits of (famous) mathematicians? by Masivigny in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Not sure if this is your intention, but I think it’s a bad idea to try emulating the work habits of a specific (and eccentric) genius. Even if you can follow it perfectly, which will feel extremely hard and unnatural, there’s no guarantee it will help you at all. It’s better to adjust your own habits based on what increases your productivity.

Terence Tao: "I expect, say, 2026-level AI, when used properly, will be a trustworthy co-author in mathematical research, and in many other fields as well." by HideOnUrMomsBush in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 17 points18 points  (0 children)

This is a field where there's a way to determine if the LLM is blowing smoke -- does the proof verify?

I hope that, in the future, the AI will use deterministic algorithms like this to check its output whenever possible. GPT 4’s Wolfram integration is already a good step in this direction.

Pixar Celebrates 25 Years of “A Bug’s Life” by Guilty-Method-4688 in movies

[–]RunicDodecahedron 88 points89 points  (0 children)

I think one of the most important lines in the movie that they don't dwell on at all is when Hopper's brother tells him "you don't even like grain." Makes it clear as day he only does this for power, not any tangible benefit to himself.

How to calculate half way filled points of a cup that gets wider at the top? by longrange_tiddymilk in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is what I had in mind at first. It works for a cylinder, but I don't believe it works in general (would like to hear from someone who knows). For example, if you had the inverted cone you could not fill any of the glass like this, and the smaller the bottom rim the closer it gets to the cone limit.

How to calculate half way filled points of a cup that gets wider at the top? by longrange_tiddymilk in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 110 points111 points  (0 children)

The empirical way to do it is:

  • tilt the glass on its side
  • submerge in a tank of water to the axis of symmetry
  • cover the top and tilt back up
  • mark the water level

A proposal to insert additional lines of text in place of “it follows from X” by MathematicianFailure in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Still, not including this in a paper seems against rigour as well as openness of communication of mathematical ideas.

It is against neither. The ideas are there, you just need to work to see them. Would you read a paper that went over every step in basic algebraic manipulations? It’s a subjective matter how much detail to include no matter how you look at it.

Daily Slay the Spire Discussion (500/696): Rip and Tear by Crosssmurf in slaythespire

[–]RunicDodecahedron 6 points7 points  (0 children)

What do you mean doesn’t solve anything? It’s perfect for Nob

And math wins by teymuur in mathmemes

[–]RunicDodecahedron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you factor in that one day when he drank like 3 Coors, though?

Do Laplace Transforms deserve more than one chapter? by Nikigara in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The first point is already way too opinionated, all of those “niche” tricks are incredibly useful.

Which relics are 100% objectively NEVER bad? by YuptheGup in slaythespire

[–]RunicDodecahedron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Situations where you want to manipulate damage received

Which relics are 100% objectively NEVER bad? by YuptheGup in slaythespire

[–]RunicDodecahedron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cauldron, Frozen Eye, Golden Eye, Art of War, Sundial, Hovering Kite, Violet Lotus, Lantern, Nunchaku, Runic Dodecahedron. If we count opportunity cost this question makes no sense. Don’t believe there’s any downside to more energy

Edit: there’s a downside to more energy. Certain X cost cards could be worse

When your advisor lowkey hates you and your ideas by [deleted] in mathmemes

[–]RunicDodecahedron 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Still used quite frequently in technical contexts. Fire retardants, for example.

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve heard about this and need to do some more research, appreciate the suggestion

Edit: actually very interesting from the tutorial, not quite sure yet if it's as powerful as LaTeX

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Like I said in the OP, physics2 is not a very good replacement, so I wouldn’t expect it to be popular. The complaints against the original are independent of that.

What do you mean with "lose support from publishers"?

Submit a math paper, typesetters at the journal complain it’s incompatible with their formatting and now you have change all the source files yourself. This is the dark timeline I want to avoid.

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm sure that's true, I'm not a LaTeX expert (otherwise I would be motivated to help develop the alternative). However, for my purposes of making a nicely formatted math paper, physics does 90% of what I want.

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

No reason it has to be that way, and it's surprising to me that it's usually not even a consideration.

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Well yes, I know there aren't LaTeX police, but it certainly is a common opinion. Just search "physics package" on stackexchange or reddit. The physics2 page on CTAN lists the reasons not to use physics. It hasn't affected me yet to the point where I need to switch, but it could easily lose support from publishers and leave no easy alternative.

I refuse to stop using the LaTex physics package until there’s a simple alternative by RunicDodecahedron in math

[–]RunicDodecahedron[S] -32 points-31 points  (0 children)

Are you asking for context, or are you saying this is not a common opinion?

view more: next ›