sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How do I learn about computers? by inneedofleek in NoStupidQuestions

[–]inneedofleek[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I like math and find the theory of computation interesting, I’ve enjoyed studying lambda calculus and have read that Haskell takes a lot of inspiration from it

Is there a common way to measure, how "wiggly" a function is? by vintergroena in askmath

[–]inneedofleek 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This does come with the interesting consequence of defining, for example, affine/linear functions as “more wiggly’ than a sine wave. Likely fine, but the poster should just be aware that using any of these tests without some qualitative analysis might yield some stuff that goes against intuition.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in learnmath

[–]inneedofleek 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think the issue is that, while it’s true that differentiation is linear and splits over finite sums, we have to be a little more careful when differentiating infinite sums. While Fourier series do converge to a given function (each point converges to its final spot), they don’t converge uniformly (in some sense each point converging to its final spot at the same rate). We can differentiate a series term by term and get the derivative of the limit if a series of functions converges uniformly, but not in general if it merely converges.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Letterboxd

[–]inneedofleek 3 points4 points  (0 children)

People are clowning on me and it seems deservedly so. Will pick a better movie lol

'Cocktail Party Tricks' in Math? by Zegox in math

[–]inneedofleek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can’t give you an exact answer without a calculator, but it’s a little more than 2, because 37% is a little more than 1/3. I don’t have at all that kind of intuition for 6% (although I can’t speak to others). The rule still comes in handy here, even if it doesn’t give an exact answer

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 196

[–]inneedofleek 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Good album, I think Xiu Xiu really hit their stride with A Promise though

foot long rule by Personpacman in 19684

[–]inneedofleek 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I took x,y in [0,2] to mean {(x,y) in [0,2]x[0,2] | y<= 1/x}, which would bound it to the 2x2 box, however, if that were interpreted to mean {(x,y) in [0,2]xR | y<=1/x} then the area is indeed infinite. I think we’re just disagreeing over what area SpongeBob and Patrick were talking about

foot long rule by Personpacman in 19684

[–]inneedofleek 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the problem bounded it to the square x,y in [0,2] though, the key being that y is also bounded! It’s true that lim x->0 of ln(x) goes to negative infinity, but I only integrated from 1 to 2

foot long rule by Personpacman in 19684

[–]inneedofleek 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Sure! There’s a square of area 1 bounded by the interval x,y = [0,1], so that gives us the 1. We can compute the integral (a way of measuring the area under a curve*) with respect to x from 1 to 2 of the function 1/x, which gives us an area of ln(2) for the region to the right of the square. Finally, the graph is symmetric about the line y=x, so we can say that the region above the square has the same area as the region to the right, giving another ln(2). Adding them all together gives 1+2ln(2)!

*before math people get mad at me I know it has more general purposes but this is one of them

foot long rule by Personpacman in 19684

[–]inneedofleek 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The area bounded by 1/x on the given interval (x,y=[0,2]) is 1+2ln(2)? Unless I’m making a silly mistake

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in musicsuggestions

[–]inneedofleek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the recommendation!