PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org
on 14 Jul 12:03
nextcollapse
Wait bottom mathematican is using j=√-1 instead of i and not the engineer? Because I’m EE gang, and all my homies use j.
GandalfTheDumb@lemmy.world
on 14 Jul 12:42
nextcollapse
That part also got me really confused. All the mathematicans I know use i while engineers use i or j depending on the kind of engineer. I’ve never seen a Pikachu engineer using anything other than j.
Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 14 Jul 14:11
nextcollapse
Pikachu engineer
That’s a fucking favorite now. Keeping that in my back pocket.
I agree. Clearly i is current. What is this i=√-1 nonsense.
grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
on 14 Jul 13:27
nextcollapse
[Lapsed] mechanical engineering gang checking in. I was also surprised. Though, tbh, I think it came down to personal preference of the professor more than field-wide consensus.
wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 14 Jul 13:50
nextcollapse
I clicked your link, I barely made it out of highschool so I have no idea what any of it means, but I like reading things I shouldn’t understand anyway, sometines it’s so interesting even without understanding.
Quaternions are the closest we get to lovecraftian horror in real life.
Four dimensional and mostly imaginary, they were carved into a stone bridge by a crazy mathematician in a fit of madness, Lord Kelvin called them “unmixed evil”, and the Mad Hatter from Alice may have been inspired by them.
Also they have been a curiosity at best for a long time, despite the efforts of a secret Quaternion Society, but they suddenly blew up in usefulness in modern times as they happen to be an easy and fast way for computers to describe rotations in 3D space, so they’re everywhere.
Yeah, lovecraftian as shit.
codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 14 Jul 16:01
nextcollapse
It gets worse actually. You can define a number system using any power of 2 amount of i-like units in a similar relationship to quaternions using the Cayley-Dickson construction
Fascinatingly, you lose some property of the algebra at each step. Quaternions aren’t commutative: ABC != CBA. Octonians aren’t associative: (AB)C != A(BC). Once you get into 16 i’s with subscripts, it really gets crazy.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
on 14 Jul 21:15
collapse
0 1 everything that comes after is simply summarizes as “many”
Baguette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 14 Jul 17:42
nextcollapse
The inner machinations of an electrical engineer is too complicated for me to understand, I think they might be thinking on a higher order to understand these circuits
Thats why I barely passed my electrical engineering class lol
exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 14 Jul 19:25
nextcollapse
Except maybe Electrical engineers.
Yup, I can count just fine to the 10th number in a zero-indexed counting system: black, brown, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, gray, white.
You’re misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how “dx can be treated as an [operand]”. And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.
∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y
Or the chain rule:
(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx
In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can “cancel” them through division. This isn’t rigorous maths, but it’s a frequently-useful shorthand.
Chrobin@discuss.tchncs.de
on 15 Jul 11:33
collapse
I do understand it differently, but I don’t think I misunderstood. I think what they meant is the physicist notation I’m (as a physicist) all too familiar with:
∫ f(x) dx = ∫ dx f(x)
In this case, because f(x) is the operand and ∫ dx the operator, it’s still uniquely defined.
Ok that’s some really interesting context I didn’t know. I’ve only ever seen it done the mathematician’s way with dx at the end. Learning physicists do it differently explains why the person in the post would want to discuss moving it around.
But I still think they have to mean “if dx can be treated as an operand”. Because “if dx can be treated as an operator” doesn’t make sense. It is an operator; there’s no need to comment on something being what it objectively is, and even less reason to pretend OOP’s partner was angry at this idea.
That’s hilarious. You’re not seeing what’s going on backwards just like that (as I point at the point going nowhere shitty) in an equation that is finding as many clAEver ways to say something you actually not caring about talking about.
That’s like, "How many time van express the only thing that van’t be done until the 'verse itself tries to do what can’t be done and sever your…
…Oh, I see…you don’t have ([of course, because you can’t have to give {is}) nothing)] to give.
Unable to sea time doesn’t mean we can’t see(k)ER the mAETh.ac(k).cc(k).08
The only thin(g):(k) that doesn’t ever be never, is not at alla hack(g)in(g).G your lackthereof to divi…
Switch it with a summation operator and see if it makes sense. The problem isn’t the operation by itself, but the fact that the operator implies an argument application, like a function.
OrganicMustard@lemmy.world
on 15 Jul 06:38
collapse
In the case of dx as an infinitesimal it makes sense. You are making a sum of all the values of the function in the integral range and multiplying with a constant dx.
burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de
on 15 Jul 13:32
collapse
Thado-mathocist. The real chad all along.
It makes me wonder if somewhere out there in a multiverse, a community of lisping incels all collectively draw the chad wojak as as an aramaic looking dude.
Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
on 14 Jul 15:03
nextcollapse
Physicist behavior
djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 14 Jul 15:25
nextcollapse
Imagine a top that isn’t math brained, giving you so much more opportunities to troll before they find out…and then when they do learn something you have been trolling them…
djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 14 Jul 20:50
collapse
No, in my experience people like that just end up trolling me because they have no frame of reference and don’t care about reality. You can’t troll somebody with math if they reject the idea of learning anything about or using math.
I did mean someone not learned already, not someone that doesn’t care to learn but I will concede the point now that you pointed out the flaws
if you have more opportunities to troll, then that’s also more room for disappointment as well, I guess I was thinking in terms of intensity more than opportunities. Thanks
If you are unaware of 4chan being a tool to push people towards fascism, you seriously need to do some more reading and learning. It is an explicit goal of the platform. Here is a random example of an article you can read. Wikipedia is also full of good information.
SuspiciousCatThing@pawb.social
on 14 Jul 21:54
nextcollapse
Technically true yeah. But I frequented 4chan in the old days. It is not the same website by a long shot. Yes, it has always sucked, but now it’s even worse somehow.
Like most other social media, I’d bet good money that there are astroturfing campaigns running trying to radicalize the those who browse there, especially since it’s easier to introduce divisive messaging as edgy humor.
Probably a higher success rate than most other social media considering the shit you see on /pol/ and likelihood of harboring incels and other ideologically susceptible users.
Agreed, I wouldn’t be surprised if 70% of posters on /pol/ were goverment employees/automated systems of various countries each pushing their own propaganda. This is true of other boards as well, but /pol/ is hardly an accurate representation.
It is unfortunate that the one place on the internet where you can voice opinions fully anonymously has fallen so much.
There is a nazi at the bar (4chan) but also there’s a gay couple at the bar (the OOP). the gay couple leaves that bar and goes to another bar (Lemmy). is the second bar and its bargoers now also Nazis?
serenissi@lemmy.world
on 14 Jul 16:10
nextcollapse
no, d…do you have a plan?
bitcrafter@programming.dev
on 15 Jul 00:01
nextcollapse
Imagining your death. :P
But seriously, it’s perfectly sensible when remember that i is just the mathematical representation of “left turn”, just like -1 is the mathematical representation of “go backwards”-- and as we know, two left turns sends you backwards. So think about this triangle in the following way:
Imagine you are a snail, starting at the origin. Now imagine that you walk forward 1 step along the horizontal line. Then you turn 90° to the left to start walking along the vertical line, but then, because you need to walk i steps along this line you take another 90° turn to the left, which means that you are now walking backwards and you end up back at the origin. How far away from the origin are you? Zero steps.
Randelung@lemmy.world
on 15 Jul 00:09
nextcollapse
Something something distance calls for norm, not just squares.
I believe the correct terminology is denominator mathematician.
vivalapivo@lemmy.today
on 14 Jul 18:08
nextcollapse
As a physicist I can’t understand why would anyone complain about a +jb or $\int dx f(x)$. Probably because we don’t fuck
RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com
on 14 Jul 20:54
collapse
As a software dude I can see you wrote a regex, I just can’t find out what you’re trying to match.
vivalapivo@lemmy.today
on 14 Jul 21:24
nextcollapse
Heeyy… So when you need to express something more, well, delicate than just code, you need to use math symbols. For that you can use tex expressions. Modern markdown supports it: just copy and paste the $…$ part into any render engine
RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com
on 14 Jul 21:37
collapse
I’m scared. I think I’ll generate some backend spec to calm down.
Phoenix3875@lemmy.world
on 14 Jul 19:24
nextcollapse
I think rather d/dx is the operator. You apply it to an expression to bind free occurrences of x in that expression. For example, dx²/dx is best understood as d/dx (x²). The notation would be clear if you implement calculus in a program.
If you use exterior calculus notation, with d = exterior derivative, everything makes so much more sense
yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
on 15 Jul 10:24
collapse
I just think of the definition of a derivative.
d is just an infinitesimally small delta. So dy/dx is literally just lim (∆ -> 0) ∆y/∆x.
which is the same as lim (x_1 -> x_0) [f(x_0) - f(x_1)] / [x_0 - x_1].
Note: ∆ -> 0 isn’t standard notation. But writing ∆x -> 0 requires another step of thinking: y = f(x) therefore ∆y = ∆f(x) = f(x + ∆x) - f(x) so you only need ∆x approaching zero. But I prefer thinking d = lim (∆ -> 0) ∆.
itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 14 Jul 22:28
nextcollapse
$\int dx f(x)$ is standard notation for physicists
jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
on 15 Jul 05:31
nextcollapse
Yes but everyone knows physicists like weird notations
cooligula@sh.itjust.works
on 15 Jul 06:29
collapse
But the post says before the integral, so I understand what they did would be $dx \int f(x)$, which is disgusting
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
on 14 Jul 23:11
nextcollapse
operative?
Also mathematicians use i for imaginary, engineers use j. The story does not add up. I have never seen a single mathematician use j for imaginary.
Interesting I never saw j from a maths person. Friends (from a decade ago!) in electronics eng dep said they use j because i was reserved for current. perhaps the latter depends on the department.
j is pretention when a math doer does it. j is for engineers and you don’t even understand the bubble ratio filtering equation let alone be asking to envision what temp you did the mAEth in.
You got lost in the number of letters instead of realizing the MeTowel’s important presence til that EOTU moment of that manufa turing of Big Black Goles you get to watch it all happen again as Thanos facepalms.
davidagain@lemmy.world
on 15 Jul 00:34
nextcollapse
Thank you for the belly laugh!
Etterra@discuss.online
on 15 Jul 04:18
nextcollapse
Can somebody ELI5 this for my troglodyte writer brain?
BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net
on 15 Jul 07:51
nextcollapse
Integrals are an expression that basically has an opening symbol, and an operation that is written at the end of it that is used also as a closing symbol, looks kinda like:$ {some function of x} dx.
The person basically said “the dx part can be written at the start also, and that would make my so mad :3”: $ dx {some function of x}.
This gets their so mad because understandably this makes the notation non-standard and harder to read, also you’d have to use parentheses if the expression doesn’t just end at the function.
An integral is usually written like ∫ f(x) dx or alternatively as df(x)/dx. Please note that this is just a way to apply the operation ‘Integration’, like + applies the operation ‘Addition’. There is no real multiplication or division.
But sometimes you can take a shortcut and treat dx as a multiplied constant. This is technically not correct, but under the right circumstances lands you at the same solution as the proper way. This then looks like this ∫ f(y) dy/dx dx = ∫ f(y) dy
Another thing you can do is to move multiplicative constants from inside the Integral to in front of the Integral: ∫ 2f(x) dx = 2 ∫ f(x) dx. (That is always correct btw)
What anon did was combine those two things and basically write ∫ f(x) dx = dx ∫ f(x). Which is nonsensical, but given the above rules not easily disproven.
This is more or less the same tactic used by internet trolls just in a mathy way. Purposefully misinterpreting arguments and information, that cost the other party considerably more energy to discover and rebut. Hence the hate fuck.
BudgetBandit@sh.itjust.works
on 15 Jul 06:50
nextcollapse
I love how that wannabe 4chan nerd just got outnerded in the comment section
answersplease77@lemmy.world
on 15 Jul 11:08
nextcollapse
so after he angered his bf he got fucked as in trouble with him or sex? raped? wtf lol
Neverclear@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 15 Jul 12:17
nextcollapse
hate fuck:
An act of aggressive sex with someone as if they had no respect for the person as an equal human being, regardless if they actually do, or not. Hate fucking usually entails aggressive, sometimes violent, degrading, and humiliating sexual acts and behaviors perpetrated by an aggressive party onto a submissive, solely in the interest of the aggressor’s own pleasure and amusement, and without regard for the submissive party’s enjoyment or well being.
Unlike rape, hate fucking is a form of consensual sex where the submissive party has agreed (for whatever reason) to accept the treatment and behavior of the aggressor.
Though unlike proper BDSM, the submissive party has not previously discussed boundaries, likes or dislikes, and doesn’t necessarily enjoy all, or even any of the treatment they receive.
Mathematicians are taught to be elastic with notation, because they tend to be taught many different interpretations of the same theory.
On the other hand engineers use more strict and consistent notation, their classes have a more practical approach.
Using the same notation makes it faster to read and apply math, a more agile approach helps with learning new theories and approaches and with being creative.
CyanideShotInjection@lemmy.world
on 15 Jul 12:09
nextcollapse
The only thing I can think of is that the OP studied electrical engineering at some point. But it’s a 4chan story so probably fake anyway.
dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 15 Jul 23:42
collapse
My initial thought was that it’s surprising that the engineer is using i whereas the mathematician is using j. But I know some engineers who are hardcore in favour of i. No mathematicians who prefer j though. So if such an engineer were dating a mathematician of all people who used j, I could see that being ♠ .
threaded - newest
Wait bottom mathematican is using j=√-1 instead of i and not the engineer? Because I’m EE gang, and all my homies use j.
That part also got me really confused. All the mathematicans I know use i while engineers use i or j depending on the kind of engineer. I’ve never seen a Pikachu engineer using anything other than j.
That’s a fucking favorite now. Keeping that in my back pocket.
OPs boyfriend is obviously an i engineer and hates j engineers. No one can stay angry at mathematicians - engineers on the other hand…
I agree. Clearly i is current. What is this i=√-1 nonsense.
[Lapsed] mechanical engineering gang checking in. I was also surprised. Though, tbh, I think it came down to personal preference of the professor more than field-wide consensus.
The fun starts when you study quaternions
i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = ijk = −1This can’t be real
They’re actually very useful: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion
(…I think you may have gotten whooshed…)
Hehe, maybe a little, but wanted to share just in case someone didn’t know :3
I clicked your link, I barely made it out of highschool so I have no idea what any of it means, but I like reading things I shouldn’t understand anyway, sometines it’s so interesting even without understanding.
So I thank you!
Quaternions are the closest we get to lovecraftian horror in real life.
Four dimensional and mostly imaginary, they were carved into a stone bridge by a crazy mathematician in a fit of madness, Lord Kelvin called them “unmixed evil”, and the Mad Hatter from Alice may have been inspired by them.
Also they have been a curiosity at best for a long time, despite the efforts of a
secretQuaternion Society, but they suddenly blew up in usefulness in modern times as they happen to be an easy and fast way for computers to describe rotations in 3D space, so they’re everywhere.Yeah, lovecraftian as shit.
It gets worse actually. You can define a number system using any power of 2 amount of i-like units in a similar relationship to quaternions using the Cayley-Dickson construction
Fascinatingly, you lose some property of the algebra at each step. Quaternions aren’t commutative: ABC != CBA. Octonians aren’t associative: (AB)C != A(BC). Once you get into 16 i’s with subscripts, it really gets crazy.
(Also, I just got the joke. Damnit @HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone your serious answer threw me off!)
Hehe, yeah, the joke was too good :P
Maybe a bit too complex for its own good.
this isn’t real
a real mathematician would use
(0, 1)instead ofiNGL, this is hot.
I’m a mechanical engineering student with a math minor and I’m a switch so yeah, I’d take either side of this
Fake and gay.
No way the engineer corrects the mathematician for using j instead of i.
How do we know it’s gay though? OP could be a girl (male)
Because it’s 4chan. And there are no women on the Internet on 4chan
Sure OP is a girl. Guy In Real Life
Newfag.
(sorry! seemed like the appropriate 4chan reply)
My thoughts exactly lol
As an engineer I fully agree. Engineers¹ aren’t even able to do basic arithmetics. I even cannot count to 10.
¹ Except maybe Electrical engineers. They seem to be quite smart.
Electrical engineers are the ones that use j though (because i is used for current)
I am used for current
Engineer here, I can definitely count to 10 tho
0 1 10
.
0 1 everything that comes after is simply summarizes as “many”
The inner machinations of an electrical engineer is too complicated for me to understand, I think they might be thinking on a higher order to understand these circuits
Thats why I barely passed my electrical engineering class lol
Yup, I can count just fine to the 10th number in a zero-indexed counting system: black, brown, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, gray, white.
xkcd.com/227/
10? That’s the name some put to 1e1, right?
Having worked with electrical engineers, some of them are quite smart, the rest have lead poisoning.
The mathematician also used “operative” instead of, uh, something else, and “associative” instead of “commutative”
I think they meant “operand”. As in, in the way dy/dx can sometimes be treated as a fraction and dx treated as a value.
I think you mean operator. The operand is the target of an operator.
Correct. Thus, dx is an operand. It’s a thing by which you multiply the rest of the equation (or, in the case of dy/dx, by which you divide the dy).
I’d say the $\int dx$ is the operator and the integrand is the operand.
You’re misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how “dx can be treated as an [operand]”. And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.
∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y
Or the chain rule:
(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx
In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can “cancel” them through division. This isn’t rigorous maths, but it’s a frequently-useful shorthand.
I do understand it differently, but I don’t think I misunderstood. I think what they meant is the physicist notation I’m (as a physicist) all too familiar with:
∫ f(x) dx = ∫ dx f(x)
In this case, because f(x) is the operand and ∫ dx the operator, it’s still uniquely defined.
Ok that’s some really interesting context I didn’t know. I’ve only ever seen it done the mathematician’s way with dx at the end. Learning physicists do it differently explains why the person in the post would want to discuss moving it around.
But I still think they have to mean “if dx can be treated as an operand”. Because “if dx can be treated as an operator” doesn’t make sense. It is an operator; there’s no need to comment on something being what it objectively is, and even less reason to pretend OOP’s partner was angry at this idea.
Right? They got that shit backwards. Op is a fraud. i is used in pure math, j is used in engineering.
That’s hilarious. You’re not seeing what’s going on backwards just like that (as I point at the point going nowhere shitty) in an equation that is finding as many clAEver ways to say something you actually not caring about talking about.
That’s like, "How many time van express the only thing that van’t be done until the 'verse itself tries to do what can’t be done and sever your…
…Oh, I see…you don’t have ([of course, because you can’t have to give {is}) nothing)] to give.
Unable to sea time doesn’t mean we can’t see(k)ER the mAETh.ac(k).cc(k).08
The only thin(g):(k) that doesn’t ever be never, is not at alla hack(g)in(g).G your lackthereof to divi…
Is this a copypasta or are you having a stroke?
Wah, wah, wah…
Not my problem.
Keep trying. /s
They both bottoms.
Relationship goals
Hum… I don’t think the integral “operator” applies by multiplication.
You can put the dx at the beginning of the integral, but not before it.
Physicists be like: whitness me
Nobody on your link is treating the integral “operator” as multiplicative.
dx \int f(x)is blatantly different from\int f(x) dxIf you were using nonstandard analysis with dx an infinitesimal you could put it outside I guess. Maybe with differential forms too?
Switch it with a summation operator and see if it makes sense. The problem isn’t the operation by itself, but the fact that the operator implies an argument application, like a function.
In the case of dx as an infinitesimal it makes sense. You are making a sum of all the values of the function in the integral range and multiplying with a constant dx.
In the context of differential forms, an integral expression isn’t complete without an integral symbol and a differential form to be integrated.
sado-mathochist
Well done, truly
Thado-mathocist. The real chad all along.
It makes me wonder if somewhere out there in a multiverse, a community of lisping incels all collectively draw the chad wojak as as an aramaic looking dude.
Physicist behavior
Gods I wish I had a top to troll like this
Imagine a top that isn’t math brained, giving you so much more opportunities to troll before they find out…and then when they do learn something you have been trolling them…
No, in my experience people like that just end up trolling me because they have no frame of reference and don’t care about reality. You can’t troll somebody with math if they reject the idea of learning anything about or using math.
I can see that.
I did mean someone not learned already, not someone that doesn’t care to learn but I will concede the point now that you pointed out the flaws
if you have more opportunities to troll, then that’s also more room for disappointment as well, I guess I was thinking in terms of intensity more than opportunities. Thanks
Why are we still visiting literal pro-Nazi websites?
Didn’t realize you had to be a nazi in order to post on 4chan.
If you are unaware of 4chan being a tool to push people towards fascism, you seriously need to do some more reading and learning. It is an explicit goal of the platform. Here is a random example of an article you can read. Wikipedia is also full of good information.
Don’t people also have pro-nazi spaces on Lemmy?
Ah, so its no longer the entire site, but a sub-group of users.
Listen, the site itself is neutral, anyone is free to post anything they want. The only actual rule is to not post anything illegal.
Technically true yeah. But I frequented 4chan in the old days. It is not the same website by a long shot. Yes, it has always sucked, but now it’s even worse somehow.
Like most other social media, I’d bet good money that there are astroturfing campaigns running trying to radicalize the those who browse there, especially since it’s easier to introduce divisive messaging as edgy humor.
Probably a higher success rate than most other social media considering the shit you see on /pol/ and likelihood of harboring incels and other ideologically susceptible users.
Agreed, I wouldn’t be surprised if 70% of posters on /pol/ were goverment employees/automated systems of various countries each pushing their own propaganda. This is true of other boards as well, but /pol/ is hardly an accurate representation.
It is unfortunate that the one place on the internet where you can voice opinions fully anonymously has fallen so much.
4chan is a largely fascist website but that doesn’t mean every single screenshot is fascist or does something to promote it
It normalizes their behavior instead of shunning it. Remember: If there’s one Nazi at the bar who hasn’t been kicked out, you’re at a Nazi bar.
There is a nazi at the bar (4chan) but also there’s a gay couple at the bar (the OOP). the gay couple leaves that bar and goes to another bar (Lemmy). is the second bar and its bargoers now also Nazis?
Doesn’t Lemmy have a ton of tankies on some instances?
If it’s fine because it’s a different instance, doesn’t that apply to different 4chan boards?
This was the reply that really made me think twice about my position.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/8c85095f-0efc-40c4-926b-baf0c2ae6216.jpeg">
Is anyone doing anything tonight?
no, d…do you have a plan?
Imagining your death. :P
But seriously, it’s perfectly sensible when remember that i is just the mathematical representation of “left turn”, just like -1 is the mathematical representation of “go backwards”-- and as we know, two left turns sends you backwards. So think about this triangle in the following way:
Imagine you are a snail, starting at the origin. Now imagine that you walk forward 1 step along the horizontal line. Then you turn 90° to the left to start walking along the vertical line, but then, because you need to walk i steps along this line you take another 90° turn to the left, which means that you are now walking backwards and you end up back at the origin. How far away from the origin are you? Zero steps.
Something something distance calls for norm, not just squares.
||i||² + ||1||² = 2
This one made me laugh almost as much as the OP. Thank you!
This is the kind of brat I can get behind. 😏
😏
But physicists actually do that? They often write it like this: ∫ dx f(x) or this: ∫∫∫ dxdydz f(x,y,z)
Better plot than 50 Shades of Grey
hehe plot. getit? math and graphs and shit
Lmfao kill yourself
I believe the correct terminology is denominator mathematician.
As a physicist I can’t understand why would anyone complain about a +jb or $\int dx f(x)$. Probably because we don’t fuck
As a software dude I can see you wrote a regex, I just can’t find out what you’re trying to match.
Heeyy… So when you need to express something more, well, delicate than just code, you need to use math symbols. For that you can use tex expressions. Modern markdown supports it: just copy and paste the $…$ part into any render engine
I’m scared. I think I’ll generate some backend spec to calm down.
Nooo… You should write spec and generate code, not the other way around
Pardon my denseness, but is this sarcasm? Since that is a TeX snippet.
Why would a RegEx start with a
$?Yeah, it is. I’m just working with what I have.
Me, a language/arts person: “Huh?”
Medical here. “Huh?”
Moron here. “Huh?”
Web dev here. “Huh?”
Webdev not knowing anything about computer science (and thus mathematics)? I am shocked. Shocked!
Fullstack dev here. “Huh?”
I think rather
d/dxis the operator. You apply it to an expression to bind free occurrences ofxin that expression. For example,dx²/dxis best understood asd/dx (x²). The notation would be clear if you implement calculus in a program.If not fraction, why fraction shaped?
If you use exterior calculus notation, with d = exterior derivative, everything makes so much more sense
I just think of the definition of a derivative.
dis just an infinitesimally small delta. Sody/dxis literally justlim (∆ -> 0) ∆y/∆x. which is the same aslim (x_1 -> x_0) [f(x_0) - f(x_1)] / [x_0 - x_1].Note:
∆ -> 0isn’t standard notation. But writing∆x -> 0requires another step of thinking:y = f(x)therefore∆y = ∆f(x) = f(x + ∆x) - f(x)so you only need∆xapproaching zero. But I prefer thinkingd = lim (∆ -> 0) ∆.$\int dx f(x)$ is standard notation for physicists
Yes but everyone knows physicists like weird notations
But the post says before the integral, so I understand what they did would be $dx \int f(x)$, which is disgusting
operative?
Also mathematicians use i for imaginary, engineers use j. The story does not add up. I have never seen a single mathematician use j for imaginary.
As an EE, I used both. Def not a mathematician though. Fuck that, I just plug variables into programs now.
I have both mechanical and electrical backgrounds. MEs like I, EEs prefer j
TIL engineers can’t spell for shit.
Cannot confirm, we always used i.
Engineer here: mostly use i, but have seen j used plenty. First time I saw j used was by a maths professor.
Interesting I never saw j from a maths person. Friends (from a decade ago!) in electronics eng dep said they use j because i was reserved for current. perhaps the latter depends on the department.
j is pretention when a math doer does it. j is for engineers and you don’t even understand the bubble ratio filtering equation let alone be asking to envision what temp you did the mAEth in.
You got lost in the number of letters instead of realizing the MeTowel’s important presence til that EOTU moment of that manufa turing of Big Black Goles you get to watch it all happen again as Thanos facepalms.
The associativity thing also doesnt make sense.
Thank you for the belly laugh!
Can somebody ELI5 this for my troglodyte writer brain?
Integrals are an expression that basically has an opening symbol, and an operation that is written at the end of it that is used also as a closing symbol, looks kinda like:
$ {some function of x} dx.The person basically said “the dx part can be written at the start also, and that would make my so mad :3”:
$ dx {some function of x}.This gets their so mad because understandably this makes the notation non-standard and harder to read, also you’d have to use parentheses if the expression doesn’t just end at the function.
Note: dollar used instead of integral symbol
I also use dollars instead of integral symbols, I don’t do math though.
An integral is usually written like ∫ f(x) dx or alternatively as df(x)/dx. Please note that this is just a way to apply the operation ‘Integration’, like + applies the operation ‘Addition’. There is no real multiplication or division.
But sometimes you can take a shortcut and treat dx as a multiplied constant. This is technically not correct, but under the right circumstances lands you at the same solution as the proper way. This then looks like this ∫ f(y) dy/dx dx = ∫ f(y) dy
Another thing you can do is to move multiplicative constants from inside the Integral to in front of the Integral: ∫ 2f(x) dx = 2 ∫ f(x) dx. (That is always correct btw)
What anon did was combine those two things and basically write ∫ f(x) dx = dx ∫ f(x). Which is nonsensical, but given the above rules not easily disproven.
This is more or less the same tactic used by internet trolls just in a mathy way. Purposefully misinterpreting arguments and information, that cost the other party considerably more energy to discover and rebut. Hence the hate fuck.
I love how that wannabe 4chan nerd just got outnerded in the comment section
I have no idea what they’re talking about, but I do love a happy ending.
Learned a new word, Hate ****
Anger bang
I too take hate shits on the toilet.
so after he angered his bf he got fucked as in trouble with him or sex? raped? wtf lol
hate fuck:
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hate+fuck
Wtf mate, nothing that serious. Anon teased him and the score was settled when they did the thing later that night.
The story looks pretty fake and gay anyway, but it’s more wholesome than your idea.
.
Why would a mathematician use j for imaginary numbers and why would engineer be mad at them?
Mathematicians are taught to be elastic with notation, because they tend to be taught many different interpretations of the same theory.
On the other hand engineers use more strict and consistent notation, their classes have a more practical approach.
Using the same notation makes it faster to read and apply math, a more agile approach helps with learning new theories and approaches and with being creative.
The only thing I can think of is that the OP studied electrical engineering at some point. But it’s a 4chan story so probably fake anyway.
fake and gay?
I think it might be the wrong way around: Engineers like to use j for imaginary numbers because i is needed for current.
My initial thought was that it’s surprising that the engineer is using i whereas the mathematician is using j. But I know some engineers who are hardcore in favour of i. No mathematicians who prefer j though. So if such an engineer were dating a mathematician of all people who used j, I could see that being ♠ .