#serious-discussion
1 messages · Page 110 of 1
You just kinda waltz into it oftentimes
Oh gosh um so for now im just doing functions but for next year im doing mathematical data management, Victors and calculus, Advanced functions, statistics.
And i forgot there was another math course
Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don't resist them - that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality. Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like.
Remember that for every thing you say as a stupid joke, there's someone out there that believes it 100% seriously
And judging from server size, they're probably on this server

Real
for every joke there’s a little truth in it
if i was alive 100 years ago i’d probably lobotomize myself
now? i don’t think so lmao
P(someone believes it 100% seriously) -> 1 as N -> infty
can u abbreviate domain to dx and range to ry
uhhhhhh definitely dont use dx lol
dx is already used in calculus
just use Domain(f) or something
I say a lot of things so sometimes i’m not 100% sure what i believe and what’s just bullshit
ah okay
are you good at math? @jagged forge
i’m not gonna ask u for help but
depends on what "good" means
i just am so stressed for this pre calc exam
lmao i’m trying to cram, it’s friday morning
i just don’t know if it’s even doable at this point
well i definitely can't help you seeing as i have rehearsals and concerts for the next 6 days 
i’m not asking for help i’m just asking if u think i will be able to get a good grade if i study hard enough
and get enough help
depends, if some concepts aren't sticking it might be too late
i understand a lot of basics for stuff
but if it's just a matter of practice, you might be able to get enough stuff crammed in time for the exam
what kinda math are you taking
math is just so frustrating for me lol
i feel like i always take notes and then i don’t understand it
i am not in school anymore but recently i havee been studying topology and probability theory
notes are good, but practice is essential to internalize things
yeah i mean it's upper undergraduate level stuff
but there are many people on this server who know much more than me
i have no idea how i’m gonna be able to take calc 1 next semester
i took pre calc in high school and it was so much easier than this
u have any advice for studying?
since you’ve studied a lot i’m assuming
well, cramming works if the material isn't too difficult and just requires stubbornness, but once you start doing hard stuff it might not work so well
so my advice would be try to follow a more regular schedule for studying this stuff
tbh i'm not really a model student, i'm a college dropout 
oh damn i assumed u graduated
i feel like i’m going down that path lmao, if i can’t even do pre calc
well, there's always difficulty spikes
most people who are good at math had to deal with it at some point
he better than you think don let him lie 🤣 🤣
i’m sure he’s pretty good at math lnao
i had a great mentor early on who gave me solid fundamentals
so despite only having his mentorship during high school geometry, i have been able to study math beyond that with decent success
that said, solid fundamentals without diligent practice only gets you so far
which is why i have hardly progressed for awhile lol
got you another equation... assume a phase of one second at every point for (1F=2F, 2F=3F, 3F=4F)-PHASE-MU where F is discernible bands of frequency, SETQ progresses for 7 Set, has AND at VU-P1-T,VU-P1-B,VU-P2-T,VU-P2-B at set 7 exactly which controls superset A1 to B2, B2 to A2, A2 to B1, B2 to A1 has 2 set and 2 set, at each 4F set pole writes to set antipole at 1F... this takes .985 percent of the bekenstein bound so it is optional to add ETH which makes the particle path write at antipole randomly at 1F and 2F randomly with 2 ETH it is enough so it is technically possible in bound
what this is a very small manifold so a valid feynman diagram, but maybe not likely diagram in reality!
----<>----_<>(<----)+(>----) to 3 terms
i have it at manual vu so actually my user skill prevents me from solving it beyond collision, it is not stochastic tho, u need ETH which makes it percents of separate diagram
huh the first term OVERRIDES in the ---- term, then you have another >---____
hey guys i have you another equation (F1=F1,U)=(F1=F2,F2=F3,U)=(1-J-(-1)-MU-0-5PHS-MU-1-U-MU-J-2-U)=(MUF3,ETH,U-MUF4)=(1,2-1,2-F1,2,3,4-3,3-ETH,U-MUF4)=(MUF4,U) ... this is for the minecraft beet... here F equals MU=F(x)=U(-0)=J=F(x2)=i, what this yields is i have just ONE beet, i cannot grow the beet, i have many beet, they tend to go into F4, the grown state because the starting state is leading to the end state when it goes into the start of the equals cascade, this means in the game when i am given one beet in one farmland i have to duplicate the beet in stages to be able to grow multiple stages of the beet to have ultimately yielded the beet having been grown! as well because eth is based around correct user input i have two types of beet which can be created, an easy growing 2-1,2-2 beet and the other beets which technically could take forever to grow, though they really take a short time...
as well a grown beet cannot yield a new beet's start of grow without the use of the -1 which causes the ability to reset
huh technically you can grow with just one beet, what i meant is it takes at least an action or route to have grown it
is this ai assisted shitposting
naw this is recreational solutions to special relativity
how do you account for relativistic compound interest rates on the blockchain
blockchain as a crypto is mainly managed by holding corporations which control the real world value of the crypto, this natural effect of people who already have large amounts of bitcoin and are leveraging the market for bitcoins value e.g. the natural effect of investors on bitcoin(s) cause the value to be raised due to speculation, and as well innovation drives the price down, as far as the iterative effect of compounding loan interest this is offset by BTC whales/sharks who buy large amounts of BTC and the hidden value of blockchain as well to have been a direct useful solution by empowering creation with the hidden processes of BTC, there also are hidden schemes like download RAM and download CPU which blockchain supports hence why most miners are labeled malware, on this mainly there is that firstoff the value of BTC is given primarially by non roman audiences using it for its canon CPU power use...
that is to say, you are talking the whole whahooza lost to romanji audiences of the direct CPU download botnet capacity of bitcoin to empower creation/gaming, but like i said shell and holding corporations management of BTC and other crypto are what drive its value combined with high speculative demand and a real world CPU power of bitcoin which is lost on romanji audiences because BTC is a gold to the romanji not like a game of resources how it is to pinyin audiences
hey uh cause a Satoshi is not a lot to a BTC whale everybody kind of already is in on the bitcoin scheme cause of the true cost of things
1,(Q4.5-6-f((-40)-(-20))(+35)-MU-2,(5PHS-MUA(-1)-1-JU(-1)MUB&C(-1))2,U(MUA.85)-U(+42)-JU(-1)MUDU(-1)3,J(MUB)-J(-MUC)-U(MUB)-U(-MUC)-U(-1)4,U(-1)JEU-1-MUE-2-U-IMPULSE5,U(-1)J(MUF)U(MUG)MUF-20PHS-MUG-U(-1)6,1,Q3.5-f(-52,-20)-U(21)-MUL-5PHS(MUM,MUO)-2,(0-JU(-1)MUM-U(-1)-JU(-1)-MUO-U(-1)-1-U)5PHS(MUP)-JU(-1)-MUP-U2,U(MUL)-F(-2)-MUR-U(-1)-JW-1,2,3,4,5-(.333PHS+.333)1-.333PHS-MUS-2-U-MUT-F7,4,2,4,7-NORMAL-U(MUW)31-2-3-4,PHS1.332-.333-Q(1-7,2-4,3-3,4-4,5-7)-MUH,MUI,MUJ,MUK-U(-1)-J-F(1,2,3,4,5)-5-5AND-MUU-(0-J-MU-U-1-U-J-1.332PHS-MUV-U(-1)-MUW this is a solution to that shark currency, a bitcoin
dude what
this is a recreational solution to special relativity
there is a threshold how many times you will have to repeat growing it for satisfying a bitcoin which changes according to a very slow never ending techno riser
is this just spam at this point
huh, actually the number of neccesary tries is never above 20, actually what you are doing is getting lucky with getting the correct length specific times to get payout
what
Yeah.. I muted them for a day
holy some young sheldon stuff
Young sheldon has logic
im convinced that this is a chatgpt copy paste
.
It sure feels like it
[laugh track]
Young Sheldon doesn't have a laugh track, luckily.
BOT WYA
Every time someone says “romanji” I die a little bit
it’s rōmaji, there’s no n
if you’re going to transliterate, at least write the right word
Because it’s Roman characters
and so because they speak English
they just think “Roman”
sigh
I guess
Are in calculus we still learn Limit? confused about why limit is placed at precalculus
usually limits are not covered in standard precalc material
Not all precalc classes do limits and limits are foundational for basically all of calc
I has Interested to learn calculus 1 while seat at 10th grade now I'm 11th grade
I guess some precalc courses might cover limits at the very end of the course but then this is usually covered again at the beginning of a calc course
Many precalculus courses cover limits, but many don't. Precalculus is very random in the US.
i'm at my limit
I'm at my threshhhhhooooold
Guys how to get good at chemistry (fast)
You don’t
You'll require some time to memorize some concepts where you cannot apply logic (cuz they're factual)
If you ignore them, then again it depends. You can do most organic and a little inorganic quickly. For physical chem, you'll require practice
So not everything can be explained in chemistry
Most people say spamming practice questions is somehow effective for chem
But idk
Not that effective especially for inorganic and organic
Subject assignment: "Linear programming"
You must explain in more detail the meaning of functions of the type f(x,y)=ax+by+c, including the concept of level line. Show through example(s) how to optimize f(x,y) taking into account bi and positive conditions. Can anyone help?
What's effective then
If you want help on this, try #linear-algebra
Yo can these fucking professors grade my shit faster
Really?
They covered it in mine
And I always shit on the education I got
Yes
Again it depends on schools but most places do not teach limits in precalc
We went over intuitive limits, conics, trig and hyperbolic trig
Wtf
Then in AP Calc we did epsilon delta limits, though I don't think we had any proof problems
He showed us some proofs
Hyperbolic trig is also pretty unusual for precalc
But didn't make us do it
We touched on it a bit
Like, I remember a "this is a thing that exists"
But it wasn't on tests and I slept through class
I guess it also depends on how long the course is
So I can't tell you how much they actually said about it
If this is a year long course then I can see covering stuff like that
Nah, single semester
Maybe I'll talk less shit about my school now
Still gonna talk shit, they don't allocate funds responsibly
Getting thorough with theory and exceptions then giving time to practice problems
insane
damn
What the ruck
What the duck
GUYS!
I solved all of the problems on my test correctly!
But i got a B because i put the wrong number in the calculator.
I might have to drop the class now 
that’s better than the time i put F instead of E for an entire test at a math competition
and not a single answer was F 
Surely the competition realized the mistake and gave you credit 
how do you study bro
i literally cannot physically put myself through it
especially math…. 🙁
i like what i study
i dont study python
Set a minimum page goal
i hate it with a burning passion
Hate is a strong word 
I’ll beat the pulp out of you
python is for pepegs am i right
Do not defend python
Lol
Bad amukh 
strongly typed
i prefer a statically typed compiled language ps
hi
hey uh
can help me with something ;-;
so
this is the problem
its not the code
i just dont get it
the solution, i mean
what even is this
Don’t cross post it amukh smh
ik i delete that one
hape
its in the problem statement
they want a === b mod M
is modulo in this context the same as in programming languages?
wtf
ikr im so confuse
it's probably just to make the output size bounded
and whats b
b_k is the remainder when you divide a_k by M
i see
yes
the real interesting part is trying to figure out what a_k is
oh im unfamiliar with that notation
where are you seeing an n
yeah
I'm guessing there's a typo and it's meant to say "for each k = 1, ..., N"
instead of "for each i = 1, ..., N"
no
because a_n is different from b_k
you know what a permutation is right?
yes
its u take k times b
i usually draw them as a matrix or a function
size k means it's a permutation of {1,...,k}
basically
permutations are linear maps right?
meaning it's an element of S_k
uh
No
why
that's not how I would describe them but you can represent permutations as permutation matrices
so !S/!K
my abs alg book draws them like matrices
bro
permutations are not matrices
They’re the wrong type of thing to be linear
but you can write them as a matrix right?
uh
why would u
there's two different notions here
I mean they can be. Just take a representation of the symmetric group
He probably means like the (1234)(1432) thing?
one is that you can write permutations in the notation
[\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&3&4&5\
3&2&4&1&5\end{pmatrix}]
propERICly_embedded
this is not a matrix
{1,...,n} -> {n,...,1} is what i usually think of as a permutation
it's just a way of writing down a permutation
thats a matrix of permutations
which is a function
which is different than a permutation
and the matrix of the function
amukh stop
ok fine
there is not even a vector space here
u do those whith adjacency
sure, but there's a 5x5 matrix of 1's and 0's that represents that permutation
i just realized something here
Yes permutation matrices are also a thing
that they arent matrices 💀
Not everything is linear
Idt that's what amukh was talking about though
matrices are linear maps under matrix operations and permutations dont use them 💀 nvm
u need to study fucking discrete math
forget i said it
i cant
[\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0&0\0&0&1&0\0&0&0&1\0&1&0&0\end{pmatrix}]
im gonna drag ur ass to discrete math
ware am i gonna do that
propERICly_embedded
permutation matrices look like this
and make u go through a whole book
i have a book on number theory and a book on combo
and a book on proofs
that should be sufficient
Homie should study LA too but oh well
i am
determinant of the permutation matrix is the chad way to define the sign of a permutation
and it doesnt matter if u dont have the basics for those topics
i have the basics
how else do you define sign
this is not basics
"count how many interchanges"?
Making em matrices is fine but that doesn’t make permutations linear 😔
lol
"even if it can be represented as the product of an even number of transpositions, else odd" is a common (maybe the most common?) definition
why
Can I ask something I should perhaps know
whats ! mean before a symbol
ok
Well I will anyway
y before?
Nevermind I figured it out
im probably typing them wrong
atta boy
yes (this is how I would define it)
cause their telling u at the beggining
proving this is well-defined is kinda annoying though
😔
the number of size k permutation
which means give B elements take K
in which the order matters
so permutations
oops thought you were referring to the earlier comment
“¡…!” Moment
Based
remember that in spanish we use both exclamation and interrogation symbols
in expressions
at least in the language
so its sort of confuses me
hahaha
LA is a good way to think about things even when things aren’t linear per se, like saturation as a Riesz rep style condition
by size k permutation they just mean a permutation of {1, 2, ..., k}
Can one of you help a brother out in the multivariable calculus chat, please?
it's well defined due to the "else" but the annoying part is showing that if it's even, then any representation involving a product of 2-cycles has an even number of factors
i.e. a bijective function from {1, 2, ..., k} to {1, 2, ..., k}
!noadvert
Please do not advertise your help channel or thread in other parts of the server. There are many people who need help, and no one person can be prioritized over other people, so please patiently wait. Anyone who chooses to help you is a volunteer who is doing so out of their own kindness.
yeah i got that part
I quite like this tbh
permutations are F1 matrices

so you also want the permutation to have no fixed points
so for every i, the permutation sends i to a different numbers
F1 vector spaces as sets
so for example the permutation
[\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&3&4&5\
1&3&2&5&4\end{pmatrix}]
would not fit the criterion, but
[\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&3&4&5\
2&3&1&5&4\end{pmatrix}]
would
propERICly_embedded
is this how u generalize permutations to a space of N dimensions?
my bad cutie. I see the wrongs in my ways now.
a_k is the number of such permutations
the RHS
how do i caculate that
huh
LHS
using the method described in the other picture you have
thats what we're solving for?
.
YES
but the point is to try to figure out a nice way to calculate it
that's the coding exercise
@solar hawk you seem to have officially ended your axler obsession
Real
just want to say
thank you guys
u made me realize i wasnt as pepeg as i though
and i can actually go through formal books by myself
with some help
what's pepeg
we never doubted you dandida
just u wait
ill get my second paper published in EE published
even though im a SE major
XD
Oh yeah Eric did you see saturation as a “k-compactness” thing of definable sets?
are u using recursion?
nvm
nvm i was being dumb asf
i put the input in the
./montmort 10 100
instead of
./montmort
10 100
LMAO
parse those args
wait wait
not it runs fine
it just says the wrong answe
wait.
i forgor to mod
lol no problem, but it was all you
I mean that makes sense, saturation has always seemed like compactness to me
I shall now learn what a space of types is 
Ye
this isn't the same thing as a type in type theory right?
It’s not quite, but
what is type theory?
If you consider the riesz rep kinda notion I mentioned, you can consider it as the type of objects which satisfy that realization thing, but no lmao
alright cool
lol this reminds me of the phd student who is mentoring me complaining about homotopy type theory
he was like, either two things should be equal or not equal, forget about this homotopy stuff
It’s not quite compactness? since making that into a genuine topology is questionable with how you might just get discrete, but it’s very similar
@pulsar pagoda short disaster
Smh bro hasn’t seen the light yet, this homotopy data is how you get the good stuff out
why are u dividing?
brp
yeah that makes sense that it's not exactly compactness, but the finite intersection property stuff is analogous
do u even know what the modulo is?
kittie
big pallas knows how to sit on paws. Kitten doesn'
its the residue of the division
yes im aware
I'm probably mischaracterizing his argument but he was complaining that everyone in HoTT sees things so differently, like they do cartesian closed categories without even thinking about heyting algebras or intuitionistic logic or smth
so u want a residue of 0
Ye, alternatively, consider the associated stone space thing, then we know that’s compact but saturation guarantees we have a “principal” point in it
okay I haven't learned about stone spaces yet
Thats a whole grown up catto, dandida
Ok yeah fair
but I will!
Space of ultrafilters on the Boolean algebra of formulas
so
woahh
This = truth assignments of formulas
what
this sounds like its useful for digital electronics
Consider this in light of the riesz rep notion mentioned
someone gave a talk here, and someone in the audience asked the speaker a definitional question (I forget what it was), then the speaker said something, and the corner of logic students just starts BURSTING into uncontrollable laughter, and then the one logic prof turns to the students and is like "and a group is a category with one object where each morphism is an isomorphism"
Genuine compactness means we have a ultrafilter which satisfies all your predicates, but saturation says at least one point is gonna look like a principal ideal
no
and the speaker was so confused, like did I say something funny
Since these ultrafilters are basically prime ideals of the Boolean algebra too
LOL
this is neat
what you have to compare is the length of ur resulting string btw
so whats a_n for some n if not n!/i!
n would be ur i
Consider the Boolean algebra of predicates w/ parameters or wtv, and replace it w/ the sets which satisfy it
right
Now it looks a lot more principal ideal-y, since if {a} is in there…
read this
So saturation asks for every k-generated ideal to be contained in a principal one? Maybe?
Don’t quote me on that, this is a very informal idea
yes
I wanna know what homie said
and N would be ur b
im not using a b in my program?
Probably some delooping thing?
Or (x=x) as a group?
remember what ur comparing is the length of the strings
wdym
I don't remember at all, I can ask some of the logic students some point later lol
Or rather, an infty group
it was some basic type theory concept tho
Hi, does anyone in here offer one on one math tutoring?
a permutation is a string
Possibly clowning him for saying something crazy basic, or from a category view (which is unnecessary)
so take the set {a,b,c,d} if u want all perm of 1 for example
how many strings can i make such that the number in the nth spot isnt n
that would be 4
i was already here
it mighta been from a category view
i can make n! permutations
but one of the guys was trying to explain and he was like "sorry it's just funny because from a logic point of view it's unnatural"
how many different strings can u make that take K elements from a set of N elements
i'm not sure what issue you're seeing, but i'm guessing probably you want to round instead of floor here
they are integers
tgamma doesn't return an integer
wait is this still for that permutation problem
cause ur dividing
yes
ye
i dont get why hes dividing
very naive implementation of n!/i! it looks like?
I'm confused, you literally have the formula for a_k right here
it's [n!\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{(-1)^k}{k!}]
propERICly_embedded
why is it so much bigger than the thing dandida was saying tho
oh I will say though that the notation of the problem is different than the solution you posted, so it should be
[k!\sum_{i=0}^k \frac{(-1)^i}{i!}]
im literally casting to static int before the push
propERICly_embedded
there is no funny business
is k here n
whats i
(k = 1,2,...,N)
the index of the sum
the number of elements you take
combinatorics is fun
read my combo book
k would represent the size
it's just that no one is explaining it to you
and then come back tot his.

what level of combo is this
read a discrete math book first
this is introductory
so like first chapter, second chapter intro?
it's one of the first applications of the inclusion-exclusion principle that you learn
(I know because I just learned it in my class
)
depends on the book
shaums outline xd
at least thats what my spanish version
that schaum sure wrote a lot of books
oh
its lipschitz
like some kind of junior serge lang
or something
schaum is my go to for discrete mathematics
when i want to fuck with people i look for other books
like discrete mathematical structures
good night!!
Probably some functoriality or something 
I asked our logic groupchat
Until further notice in this section we assume that T is a complete theory.

Non-complete theories have a lot of problems
group theory is stupid, I only study the theory of V4
so whats the sequence of topics
linear algebra, abstract algebra
galois
?
like that
Idk I’ve not done any Galois
is galois the gigachad they say he is?
idk he's dead, if he were that then he would still be alive
Is there an analytical solution for this such that doesn't diverge? It can be assumed that $a_0$, $Z$ are constants. $$\int_0^\infty \left[ \frac{1}{r} \left( 2 - \frac{Z r}{a_0} \right) e^{- \frac{Zr}{a_0}} \right] dr$$
jacobjivanov
oh @fringe summit someone just answered
so someone asked what dependent type theory was and he responded something about it being the internal language of topoi

I mean honestly yeah
Give or take a specific definition of dependent type theory ofc
Idk why they’d clown him, but I guess you could just say it looks like HOL in that case too
Say that dependent types B:A->U are bundles B->A
I don't know anything about topoi or dependent type theory
whats type theory?
but they were probably thinking of proof theory and curry howard
lambda calculus and stuff
good question
I hear there's a class on type theory next semester so maybe I'll find out
I mean idk a proof theory description
sounds like stuff compiler writers would use
I don't know anything
indeed!
Yes, program verification
like modulo theory satisfiability?
what
that is used for verifying the design of software synthesis (designing digital logic circuits through software)
Yeah idk what “modulo” is doing there
at least its what my phd buddy told me, theres this guy using it for generative ai
If you can prove some soundness or completeness (you’re kinda boned if you’re not effective? so it had better be effective) then passing back & forth is nice
did i just asked big boy questions?
Symbol pushing, formal systems, deductive stuff
syntax and semantics are VERY important to logic
interpretation
Yeah basically just interpretation
sharp I asked my mentor when continuous logic gets different from first-order logic and he was like NO NO NO that's the whole point it's the same!!!
But the exact way you go about it can vary based on what you want the semantics to look like
BASED
Think categorical semantics vs set based semantics vs kripke frames vs full semantics for HOL etc
But 3 of those are just set based ones
sets are magical
Basic idea is sending things to sets w/ relation and/or function structures
ahh
and seeing if there are order and equivalence relationships?
and stuff of that sort
(Though I often see false <= true in a poset thing)
sharp maybe the best way to do this is to do an example (like group theory in first-order logic)
Ye
A group is a particular interpretation of [the group theory]
A set with its functional structure from multiplication and inverses
a set with at least one operation which is associative has an inverse and posseses a identity
yeah the semantics of group theory is like looking at the actual sets themselves which are groups
Normal model theory is essentially interpretations of theories in ZFC
the syntax of group theory is like looking at all the statements that are true about groups and trying to write logical deductions between them
The syntax of group theory doesn’t need sets at all
You can have group objects in any category, for example
There’s model stuff you can do in categories or whatnot but that stuff gets awful looking afaik
like for example start from "for all x, there exists y such that xy = yx = e" and the rest of the group axioms and derive stuff like "if there are exactly four elements, then either there exists an element x such that x^4 = e or for all x ≠ e, x^2 = e"
none of those statements actually need the concept of a "set" and you can write logical deductions going from the one sentence to the others
an element of the group yeah
cause u said there are no set
Really how I’d see it done is the theory demands a domain A, a binary function symbol m, and an identity symbol e, so the interpretation has a genuine set A, genuine function m, and genuine element e
yeah, so from a syntactic perspective "for all x" is just a meaningless symbol which is given meaning only by the deduction rules that involve it
for example, the key property of "for all x" is that if you have something like "for all x, phi(x)" then you can immediately deduce "phi(y)"
it does not matter what phi is
There’s no set per se, but think of it as encoding a sort of truth-valued function which takes arguments from A, if you have \forall x:A
that is, the correctness of an argument only depends on what form it is in!
not on the actual content of the argument
mmm
this is why stuff like this is called formal because we're only concerned about the form of the argument
Permutation???
kind of like what coding theory does
what lol where did permutation come from
wait
Yeah no it’s just syntactic, like programming language
He means the literal written structure
It’s just symbols
are u mapping those symbols to truth values?
Imma give two different arguments about completely different things
I am 21. Anyone who is 21 can legally drink alcohol. Therefore I can legally drink alcohol.
It is raining. Whenever it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground is wet.
Not quite, we map the sentences formed out of these symbols to truth values though, and demand that the interpreted structure follow it
both of these arguments are about completely different things
but they share the same argument form
X. X implies Y. Therefore Y.
so when I speak about deduction rules, I'm abstracting away from all of the specific details of an argument and only concerned about its form
does that make sense?
it's a very different way from how we usually think, I think, but it's an important abstraction
yup!
so like another example of this is:
For all X, phi(X). Therefore phi(Y).
The point of syntax is that "for all" is just meaningless symbols until you introduce this deduction rule, and then once you introduce this rule, that gives it its meaning!
ok
In other words, the meaning of different strings comes from what other strings you can deduce from it
Whereas in semantics, the meaning of different strings comes from whether they are true or false in a certain interpretation
Alternatively, you can view it as a sort of thing like x:X, f:X->Y therefore f(x):Y, like function application
would the domain of discourse be what it gives meaning?
Yeah that’s where your interpretation is, or what you quantify over
this is a semantic notion
once you want to start assigning interpretations where you map the symbols into actual things in your domain of discourse, that is semantics
now i get why they say logicist are good at algebra
i didnt say they cold know more than an algebraist per say
but it makes sense
since its pertaining to the structures of arguments
But the point is there are two parallel approaches here
- Syntax: The meaning of a formula results from what other formulas you can get to from it using formal deductions
- Semantics: The meaning of a formula results from your interpretation, that is, how you map different symbols in the formula to objects or relations in your domain of discourse
Gödel proved the completeness theorem in his PhD thesis which (along with the soundness theorem) actually shows that these two viewpoints are equivalent for first-order logic
Any implication you can prove (syntactic) is true (semantic), and any implication that is true you can prove
two sides of the same coin, if you will
mm interesting
its almost like this advanced undergrad concepts are approachable if u know who to ask the right questions
#1156787258641367102 anyone knows?
cause this would we covered in a undergrad logic course?
how would I do 2^2/5 - 2^3/2
i think urmum forgot the parentheses around 2/5 and 3/2
and was asked to estimate this
similar to some interview problems ive gotten if so
well its not that hard
All of AG :^)
You’d probably cover this + some
se esta quemando el rancho? (its shit hitting the fan for the help channels?)
yes completeness is like the first big theorem you'd learn
Please do not advertise your help channel or thread in other parts of the server. There are many people who need help, and no one person can be prioritized over other people, so please patiently wait. Anyone who chooses to help you is a volunteer who is doing so out of their own kindness.
How do you close / mark solved a thread in #1021175428326633542
Dont tag me
srry afk but yeah
please stop posting your help thread everywhere
.solved
Thanks
I think .close also works
how would I simplify 2^(2/5) - 2^(3/2)
ok
i finished it
does it have anything to do with surds
yes
This in his PhD thesis is wild, it’s not crazy hard to get to but still
is it wilders than nash's?
It’s wild that the dissertation is still referenced at all
how long ago was it published?
A while
if i remembered correctly he constructed a thing called godel numbers
no
ohh
wrong theorem
ahh
gödel proved an insane amount of things
That’s incompleteness
Well, there’s some distinction ig between a syntactic proof of completeness vs a semantic flavored one
Idk which one is henkin
A semantic one kinda falls out immediately from like, ultraproducts 
constructing a model to satisfy consistent sentences
Ye, godel did one based just on syntactic stuff, which is cool
is fuzzy logic and fuzzy set theory covered in discrete math?
furry logic and furry set theory
can someone pls help me with proofs
it seems not many ppl are active when it comes to proofs
What
What’s that even mean
fuzzy
name the one best math book to learn all of calculus
the one i wrote
you can buy it now for a small price of $100,000 + shipping + tax
buy 1 for the price of 2 and get 1 free!
calculus for dummies...
sup
hey guys i got an idea: assume we have two chains of audio, these parallel chains equal in gain at both -6dB. Thus, also if we have a -6dB chain we can have two -12dB chain which will equal unity with the -6dB. as well, there is the boostier which goes from 0dB to 6dB - the boostier enables more exponential behavior. as well there is the necessity for no signal at some times, but this always is to create the correct global 0dB summation at both ends. of these two domains are formed of solution of a high and low, they are the beginning and end of the timeline in question for example a trajectory... this usage of modulated unity is an efficient way to solve parabolas using only amplitude modulation of audio or in other words VCAs!
*a boostier is used with a lesser signal that goes to zero to create a resonance at some point of the lesser signal
Guess whos back
guys why do you think i am trolling i just want to talk
i enjoy reading ur posts
ahaa means a lot
especially ones that are more like this one, where i can follow what's going on
sorry for being over presumptive
some of the other ones i have no idea
huh, this is actually the domain of the heisenberg orbitals, hard maths not the electrical engineering i was talking about earlier
bitcoin is so hacky! i can see why you would have trouble understanding that specific one because it is real patchy the BTC solution
i can explain a little herein, there is a delayed integral which is taken at two places, if it is not too long and correct integral it is valid... that is how the miner talks to the blockchain, for the blockchain... hmm, a little harder, the blockchain generates a valid-through-inversion pulse if you get a GO, YOU ARE MINING BTC signal from the BTC server... This is a Mandelbrot fractal e.g. 7-4-1-4-7 is what I used for my miner... then, if the valid initial fractal is detected it passes the inversion of the fractal for the length of the fractal (phew)... as well bitcoin has 3 modes which are the relative difficulty of the mining, if the server GO, YOU ARE MINING BTC signal is a long signal then it is more difficult to mine than if there was no start signal, and your mining client will always respond to the server signal to start being more difficult mining which this happens if you are not using a real btc miner and it is pirate it is difficult to mine!
soo, what this means is you keep your signal going for the longest and you have won the pot that the holding corporation puts down, some BTC! these lengths of excursion now are very long!
well, you got the access to bitcoin mining with a miner which is just 5kb in this described protocol. and your wallet which actually is most of your miner pack actually. the exe of the miner is just 5kb tho here
i can get the protocol's logon down to 36kb! actual protocol is only 200kb, but huh, that detection of mine is all technos and efes and jasons work that is in them analysis packs
mining* sorry not mine
@burnt ledge hey check #chill i got an image of the parabola formed, all i did was hold up button so it is totally what you get if you just advance the time
it looks substantially shallower on the right than it does on the left... how come the parabola is asymmetric?
huh, that is because all i am doing is some bending like aang not actually solving any equations! what comes out could be anything!
hey gimme a sec and i can get you another parabola
or uh, whatever you call it
that is where i have messed up the equals, but it is still a parabola - note how it goes down first, then up
@river moon Hi
So like
We started off with the purely discrete case, a spring element
yea uh it is just a pointonemeter that is based around or varisistor
You get what's called an element stiffness equation for that specific element
Then you look at an assembly, a combination of elements
And with some math you can find what's called the global stiffness equation, which relates all of the nodal forces to the displacements and stuff
all these resistors have to be connected to ground and have no crosswiring, this is not a perceptron!
ah yes, ohm's law x'' = ma
There's some rules for connecting all of the different element stiffness matrices
But the end result always looks tridiagonal, like you said
So that's why I was like
Wait you know about this?
Ok so after that
hmm, they are yea not actually parabola unless you have some kind of complete set
I know exactly 0 physics
yea that is what i meant, u have continous then it is possible to approximate a parabola
dw about the physics
You just need to understand that
that is what U 1 implies in physics that we have a field of this
Every element has an element matrix equation
huh but what if i am more water than air
And for an assembly/composition/arrangement of elements, we can combine all the element matrix equations to get a global equation
Which always looks tridiagonal
Now for a continuous element we do the same thing
And you can see my element matrix equation at the bottom right
Are you following so far?
Now the cool part is that
gosh yea so what i meant by water is that i have specific continous element forma which i use already and that having more than what is already there which is what physics implies is ego dyscongruent
In the continuous case
Those displacements u_i and u_j
are actually partial derivatives
huh, yes there is probably some evidence of this i have said on reddit!
u-g and u-i are supersets of the evidence i laid!
but probably others have done it it is verry common
And so by asembling the continuous elements like we did before we get the same tridiagonal system but as a PDE this time
which is why I was surprised you knew it'd be tridiagonal hehe
But Sverek explained it
Sorta
I have to do some reading
LOL

huh, yea u got some buffer which forms which is u-d based
that is all based around timeline which is what you said that that is that continous element time leads to the formation of said maths
what we have here is just some arbitrary imaginary time which is some space planets from some space exploration game
The stress terms should actually be partial derivatives of stress terms
these are not very common isometric solutions and that is not for bending that is for the physics, i am after specific imaginary time of starfield planet menu
So you'd end up with partial derivatives on both sides I'm fairly certain
*isometric is what is attempted and yea there is the introduction of resonant partial derivative with boostier
*also the later linked is a molinya view so it buggers off into eternal bang if we try to use it as a start to relativity without a contrary partial derivative at the other side
huh well if you do this right it is a line that is just an exponential curve and you have no triagonal formation of endpoint vanishing, what i did is bending to form some isometric view
*these are valid imaginary time because imaginary time implies all multiverse thus these specific time loops are seen SOMEWHERE but maybe not anywhere but imaginary time
Hello

Math challenge!
If B+A =10 and A - B = 6.
What are the values of B and A
(It’s really easy)
Bro it’s so easy
if it's so easy then why don't you do it yourself?
lol
Tteppa stop trying to hide the fact you can't solve it smh
@neat lintel
@mint patio #chill message
Solve this
Don't ping me
yo there is where we don't have the trilinear artefact!
sorry wont ping u
that is where i had solved it mostly right, but it is the wrong direction here! sorry
How is 2 - 8 = 6
It’s not
I don’t need help
Ops
please for the love of god get your homework in a #❓how-to-get-help channel
I don't know what I want to do with my life fuck mannn

