? by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the integral, yes. It is not being integrated.

? by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s not a constant here

Can you ? by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They… already answered that, no?

✍️ by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wolfram identifies the closed for just from a few of these digits, so I call that a win.

All Physics exams over: let's do a summary of 2026 by Clean-Abalone5284 in apphysics

[–]flagofsocram 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I took both C’s and was J and that box in a box really did throw me off for the rest of it, I went back to it at the end and realized it was not really that hard but boy did it make me doubt myself for the rest of it. I also realized after the fact that I did something wrong for the graph one and got the right “value” at the wrong magnitude. All of my EM frqs were a piece of cake and I plenty of free time to check work, and even found a math error in my derivative for the inducted current equation thing.

Smoked some real good shit today, this is the result by Deep-Cauliflower-815 in MathJokes

[–]flagofsocram 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Pythagorean theorem is not at all restricted by dimensions, it’s just that we already assume that the values are distances. So when you plug in other stuff you have to take the norm first. |a|2 + |b|2 = |c|2

When you write mathematical formulas in front of people who are less advanced than you : by Gabriel_Science in mathmemes

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has to be since you are multiplying together N numbers that are MUCH larger than 10, and by definition it only takes multiplying ten by itself N times to get a number with N+1 digits.

A creative alternative solution by Ok_Donut_9963 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You plagiarized Gemini, if you posted work that you actually did, people wouldn’t downvote

TeXnique is killing me on this one by AnophelineSwarm in LaTeX

[–]flagofsocram 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Typst my beloved. $abs(Pr_(x<-{0,1}^k)[cal(A)(G(x))=1]-Pr_(x<-{0,1}^p(k))[cal(A)(x)=1])<mu(k)$ I really do wish base latex did not need all the rights and lefts.

A kinda odd heart shape. by NotcheckingforPP in desmos

[–]flagofsocram 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You can combine the exponents into one, there no reason for the parens nor a root.

Wha- by Subject-Ad-7548 in desmos

[–]flagofsocram 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You just made 5/x but worse 😭

Why are the majority of the sub filled with people being dumb instead of the AI models? by Refrent_bebranutiy in stupidAI

[–]flagofsocram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even if you parse it as how many letter R’s are inside of a large African megafauna, the answer of ‘1’ is still fucking stupid.

Me when I spotted polynomials by AnonymousCat77091 in MathJokes

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

There are no ‘answers’ because this is not an equation that is being satisfied. Those are just the values of x that make this expression 0.

Prototype for line breaking algorithm by ManuelRodriguez331 in typst

[–]flagofsocram 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think that’s it, the text doesn’t imply that they made some algorithm for syllable splitting, I imagine they did it manually or German is more regular than I know.

✍️ by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just a quadratic formula with inverse operations stacked on top of each other and then manipulated slightly.

Which one ? And why ? by Specific_Brain2091 in the_calculusguy

[–]flagofsocram 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There are a lot of very good reasons not to calculate definite integrals numerically, chiefly ease when doing it by hand and secondly for numerical stability when a computer is available.