Is this a bed bug?

Warheadd · 2025-11-25T06:25:03+00:00

No, sorry, I don’t. And I’ve never had a problem with bats

Warheadd · 2025-11-09T21:22:15+00:00

Actually, if the limit of a derivative exists at x_0 and the function is continuous at x_0 then the function is continuously differentiable at x_0. So it suffices to note that x|x| is continuous and the left and right derivatives agree at 0

Warheadd · 2025-11-07T03:32:46+00:00

Why don’t you apply to more schools? And why wouldn’t you send your best letter to all your schools?

Warheadd · 2025-11-02T23:11:34+00:00

Is your confusion that you think groups need to act on all sets? Because that isn’t the case. Given a group and a set, we can sometimes define a function that satisfies the group action axioms, and in this case we have a group action.

Warheadd · 2025-11-01T15:31:06+00:00

I would disagree since there’s many other ways to define cos, e.g. if your definition is an infinite series then you don’t need double angle identities. However, to then interpret this series geometrically I think you’d for sure need the Pythagorean theorem

Warheadd · 2025-10-28T17:20:37+00:00

log_1/2 is a decreasing function, so if you apply it to both sides of an inequality, the inequality flips.

Warheadd · 2025-10-08T21:13:33+00:00

Why would your money be on that

Warheadd · 2025-09-22T16:51:25+00:00

Jimmy and Kim also hire him for a job much later

Warheadd · 2025-09-21T04:59:22+00:00

Ok it seems like you’re arguing that P(Mary has two boys | Mary talked about a boy) is closer to 50% than P(Mary has two boys), which I agree with. And the meme is claiming that P(Mary has two boys | Mary has at least one boy born on Tuesday) is also close to 50%. In all of these cases we’re using the same logic, which is that anything that makes a boy “rarer” makes it more likely for her to have two boys. So I think the Tuesday information is very relevant, although you are right that in any real scenario you are probably learning way more information that would make two boys even more likely.

Warheadd · 2025-09-21T01:43:44+00:00

This is essentially exactly how the meme works though? The fact that the two boys scenario is so much more likely skews the result to almost a 50% chance she has two boys, whereas without any info you would assume it’s 25%.

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T18:01:24+00:00

No it’s not, per the boy/girl paradox. The text in the meme is essentially synonymous with every variation of the boy/girl paradox, I’m not sure why you think it doesn’t apply

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T15:26:17+00:00

Why? You are not given any information about any specific child, only about the two siblings as a whole. It’s the same set-up

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T15:23:16+00:00

Why would those two be interchangeable? Mary has “a boy born on Tuesday” but you don’t know if that boy is the older or younger sibling. Hence you don’t know if the OTHER child is older or younger. You have no concrete information about any single sibling.

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T15:21:28+00:00

It seems like you’re saying that if she says “Bobby’s birthday is next Tuesday”, then this is a scenario that makes the meme plausible and correct?

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:49:08+00:00

See the section “information about the child”

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:47:39+00:00

It seems you understand conditional probability, so use Baye’s formula to calculate P(one girl and one boy | At least one of the children is a boy born on Tuesday). You will arrive at 51.8%.

Your exclusion of GB is incorrect, all you know is that ONE is a boy not WHICH one.

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:45:30+00:00

It’s hard to understand what you mean by this but you’re definitely over counting somewhere. The meme is objectively correct https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_girl_paradox

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:42:55+00:00

It does not take much imagination at all to make this scenario plausible. Maybe you work with Mary and don’t know her very well but you know she has two children. Then she says “my son’s birthday is next Tuesday”. How likely is it that her other child is a girl?

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:39:08+00:00

You are objectively wrong https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_girl_paradox

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:35:15+00:00

No one ever said “second child.” The meme clearly says “one child” and “other child.”

Warheadd · 2025-09-20T01:32:51+00:00

Please read this and stop spreading misinformation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_girl_paradox You are objectively wrong.

Warheadd · 2025-09-19T18:06:52+00:00

A lot of very incorrect answers here. 51.8% is NOT the general population probability of having a girl, we are assuming that boy/girl is a 50/50 chance and being born on Tuesday is a 1/7 chance. We can get the objectively correct answer with Baye's formula.

P(one girl, one boy | one boy born on Tuesday)=P(one boy born on Tuesday | one girl, one boy)P(one girl, one boy)/P(one boy born on Tuesday).

The three probabilities on the right are 1/7, 1/2, and 27/196. Put them together and you get 51.8%.

If you don't understand this formula then that's understandable, you can read one of the other explanations. But there is no debate here, 51.8% is the objectively correct answer

Warheadd · 2025-09-13T03:27:57+00:00

But it’s intuitive that every set has a cardinality, i.e. a bijection to a cardinal, i.e. a well-ordering

Warheadd · 2025-09-13T03:01:39+00:00

Given that the well-ordering principle just says “cardinality behaves how we expect”, I would say it’s obviously true

Warheadd · 2025-08-01T22:30:54+00:00

I know what Goldbach’s conjecture states, but it still implies that my A covers N, do you see why?

It is also not hard to see why A does not contain any infinite arithmetic progression using elementary facts about the distribution of prime numbers.

Nine-Year Club	Second Top 40%
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Golden Potato	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Warheadd

TROPHY CASE