#serious-discussion
1 messages · Page 192 of 1
But I am just too stupid to figure out the two remaining complex integrals
Like for fresnel it's supposedly some quarter-circle
yes :3
I tried calculcating the border of the circle. But the integral I get is...
no
I can't even solve it
I was thinking of maybe showing that it's bounded by some sort
could be
But another thing I am wondering. When you self-study and get stuck on problem. Do you also put some problems on your "to-be-done proof list"? Or do you skip those? @latent edge (ping scary, pls don't hurt me)
:3
Hello
Hey, sup?
Like I said I'm very messy
I don't make lists like this
everyone wanna talk abt uni entry rn... so bust
omg hi
No, the sushi had wasabi though
and apple
and berries...
definitely
it has been long time no chat whats been up
A ton of work, you?
no, it can't
blo woke up and chose the meaning of life
stay woke
wasabiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
@empty rapids
yo wassup
yeahh
So as a pharmacy technician, we organize and bag drugs for people (pretty straight forward)
breaking bad 💀
ah
💀
we can also handle up to class 3 drugs, but pharmacists can handle class 2 drugs. Class 1 drugs are entirely banned in America
Yeah, whenever people ask me about my new job I say “(legal) drug dealer” lmaoooo
I gotta be careful tho bc not everyone will take it well
LOL
ah
Class 2 drugs are stuff like adderall
Which I really need as someone who has ADHD but they keep being back ordered😓
make urself ur clearly someone who knows "stuff"
give generic advice to people
ladies first 🙏
💀
you said it first 😐
I did 
what's your advice for the lil homegrown druggie
who's starting out in a vicious world of oppression and angst
my advice is to give generic advice to people
i know all about vicious
the system wants to take the bulldog down
you could say its almost my middle name
and by almost my middle name i mean its my first name :>
If you have ADHD and you have adderall ER that’s on back order, get IR instead
doesn't answer the bruhs question
whos question
i answered every question didnt I 
u need dementia drugs NGL
this question? i answered it...
oh no that WAS my advice 👀
this was your advice
:>
@left moth r u satisfied nayy
with the answers
he's too old so forgive ya broiee
What?
"generic advice"
@empty rapids btw how are you liking calculus 3 and differential equations so far? What are you learning in ODEs?
I think they're both pretty interesting and relatively easy, I've been learning about techniques for solving odes like first order linear odes, bernoulli odes (basically linear after a substitution), homogeneous odes just using a substitution, exact odes using the total differential, using reduction of order/variation of parameter to solve second order linear odes given one of the linearly independent solutions. Then you can tell if two (or more) functions arelinearly dependent or independent using the Wronskian, which is basically the determinant of a matrix based on these functions and their derivatives. Then there was also existence and uniqueness theorems for first order odes and second order linear odes, and we also learned how to graph slope fields better by using the first and second derivatives to find behaviors of general solutions....
i may have went into too much detail but im trying to see what i can remember off the top of my head LOL
Easy? Wow I think that calculus 3 is hard, maybe its the combination of classes and my work schedule
I think it can get difficult but it’s very manageable
well yeah i think its easier if you have more time ☠️
i, for instance, don't have a job as well ☠️
Would you say calculus 3 or differential equations is easier and which one is more time-confusing?
Hello!
Hello
well the differential equations lectures are shorter but i feel like they have more material than given credit for, I think I don't deeply understand odes as well and also i got 100 on multi first exam but 96 on odes first exam 💀
i think odes is a little bit harder ig idk
Okay the difference between a 96% and a 100% is nothing
Literally it’s like if you made some silly algebra or arithmetic mistakes
Are you taking any other classes?
you know thats true that's not fair i literally just missed a negative sign and got knocked off four points 💀
yea i have a history and an english
Oof
honestly the english is the most annoying one 💀
That’s not that bad if you don’t work
yea exactly XD
all odes are either linear, in which case it's just linear algebra, or nonlinear, in which case it's hard
LOL real
I’m wondering if I’d be more consumed by calculus 3 this semester or differential equations next semester
eh i wouldn't worry too much ngl 💀
I’d be taking differential equations and physics 1 next semester and I might retake chemistry 1
when i learn more linear algebra i probably would understand linear odes a bit better lol
putting the question on you know, how is linear algebra compared to multivariable 💀
😂
There’s a lot of overlap actually
i'm not surprised
i mean there also a bit of overlap in odes
Not 100% but maybe 70-80% of conepts overlap so far
wow XD
Bruh ODEs and physics 1 will feel so different bc the level of math is so different
probably XD
Calculus 3 applies to physics 1 but only if you already understand the physics concepts which I don’t
wait btw how do you think difficulty calc 2 to calc 3?
Bc most of the math in the class is just algebra…from a formula sheet
pretend this question made sense you know what i mean 💀^
Idk bc I really enjoyed methods of integration. I got a 92% on that exam and my favorite sections were trig sub and trig integration at the time, but I got a B in the class and it was difficult
physics education is interesting because the level of math you need to get the concepts is usually a class or two ahead of the level of math you use to do calculations
Dish, washer, and whatever methods…those haunts me. I got like a 60% on that exam
interesting
like the more conceptual XD
Those things probably traumatized me lol
I really enjoyed Taylor series
I got like a 85% on that exam without studying bc I didn’t have time to bc of my tutoring job
kinda sad ngl
e.g. newtonian mechanics requires calculus to understand but most problems are algebra, E&M requires multivar to understand but most problems are single variable
I wonder if there’s a pedagogy reason that makes sense for that
how did it compare to multivariable tho?
Bc I was using double integrals for this one rocket problem in my physics class and that’s calculus 3 material but most of my class were just learning power rule with derivatives for the first time
Idk bc I’m still taking calc 3 lol
fair XD
I don’t wanna say that calc 3 is easy just to eat my words later on
real XD
like yeah i havent gotten to the vector calc stuff so i might eat my words later 💀
half of vector calculus is learning an entire alphabet of derivatives and the other half is learning the fundamental theorem of calculus 3 times
LOL
My professor was like:
“dim sum, how did you solve this?” so I could say it to the class
me: you’re basically given the final position s2 which you can use to isolate a1 by adding together a double integral being s1, another double integral being a2 which is just gravity, and an integral that accounts for the change of position due to momentum.
Him: “Yeah, I can’t show that to the class.”
i dont like the fact that theres "theorems" tho :l
After class I told him that if I wrote what I did on the board, my class would’ve panicked lol
☠️
tbf a calc 1 student could probably pretty easily understand double integration if they understand single integration 💀
as long as they aren't integrating multivariable regions or nothin 💀
Not when they’re learning power rule for the first time. They’re still being tested on limits in their calc 1 class
The difference quotient
oh yea 😭
you keep showing this but i never know what it means <:) 😭
Honestly I would’ve lowkey enjoyed seeing all of those horrified faces lol
LOL
imagine the professor pulls one over you and gives you the most horrendous physics problem ever seen to man 💀
the students would be even more traumatized but... XD
here's how thomas' calculus attempts to explain it
this is why we don't use thomas' calculus
☠️
I was itching to use matrices in physics 1 lol
☠️
I don’t think I would be able to use differential equations in physics 1 though
doubtful in physics 1
i mean maybe like seperable but 💀
Calculus 2 is a coreq for our physics 2 class here but apparently the class is mostly just algebra as well
Like bruh
this is why i have a hard time believing physics is so hard as I hear it is
especially when they hype up calc 2 in difficulty and then i get there and realize they were hyping it up for nothing 💀
Me too
Because calculus literally exists just because of physics
How are these classes so separate?
😂
like physics should just be "here's some facts on how math applies irl, now use these facts to figure out how to solve this problem"
🌳 🍎
granted that COULD be hard but i feel like with practice and understanding....it really shouldn't be
*as long as you have time and are not taking 2 other math classes and working a job at the same time 🗿
lol
Well I’m working 2 jobs at the same time and all of this
a lot of physics teachers take the approach that the difficulty in physics should be from setting up the math rather than the math itself
even better 😭
That’s also an interesting point
fair
The calculus is can be considered a shortcut
Unless you’re dealing with nonconstant acceleration in physics 1 which idk if you do
Yeah that’s the hardest part for me
i rate things by difficulty on how hard it is to get a deep understanding
lol
physics is...wel....physics
usually, more or less
interesting
I’d like to ask someone who’s understand better if I’d be able to use differential equations in my physics 1 class lol
Sometimes scaring people with math is cool🙀
You definitely could
How?
Although the use case depends, you could always abuse measure theory and the like
Physicists don't delve into the topic early on
Idk measure theory lol
What topics are within this physics 1 class?
I’m gonna tag you in #multivariable-calculus bc they won’t let me post pictures here
Who do we think are the most whimsical mathematicians? Like, the areas of math with the best names for stuff
Perhaps topology, though probably due to its breadth
However, the ones with most potential might be the high general areas, such as category theory or model theory
I do wonder whether future mathematicians may employ slang when naming constructions
Not a comprehensive list
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1102872/unusual-mathematical-terms
Oh that’s funny—the baby monster group and the whole moonshine area is really cute 🤪
any indian?
I probably asked this here years ago but I still can't get it out of my head
Do you believe it is possible for hypothetical alien species to develop math numbers concept in a completely different way than humans?
Humans arithmetic began as a way to count objects, so the humans developed the concept of natural numbers first
Then it gradually evolved towards the whole continuum, e.g., real numbers
So for example consider a gas species that has no idea of differentiating between objects. Let's say their "vision" (or whatever senses) is kinda blurry and they do not sense the borders clearly. They develop the real numbers first, as the concept of counting for them is not obvious. And then they come up with natural numbers as the subset of R
people that have few words for colors in their language use the same word for different colors as if they were the same color, so why not
I don't really see the analogy here
what's more important at the moment and natural will be developed first
Chatgpt said their sensory systems would be distributed across the whole body
They would prioritize the perception of the change in environment like temperature, vibrations and electromagnetic field
So they sense the "gradients" of the environment
<@&268886789983436800> if someone's username is 'bigga', what should happen to that person?

so 1) pls modmail instead of here
2) i suppose they would rather not get smalla
why wld anything happen to the person
my money getting bigga and bigga 💯
the problem with ModMailing is that
there was someone with a really offensive username, but not racist or transphobic or anything
that’s a thing that modmail is good for
ijust rememebered that christian rap
someone else pinged mods
and roketto it was actually banned that person
and banned them again for rejoining
(roketto had seen the modmail and was talking about it)
okok
we love roketto

How can electrons be fundemental particles if they emit photons when jumping to a lower orbit
Were the photons sticked to the electron giving it energy
no the photons are created when the electron loses energy
kinetic energy ?
they are fundamental particles though, it's not like they are bundles of photons or something
electrons and photons are both fundamental particles, photons are how the electromagnetic force is communicated in the first place
or rather, the electromagnetic field is what gives rise to the electromagnetic force, and photons are localized oscillations in that field
when two electrons repel each other, you can think of this as happening because there is some (virtual) photon that communicates this repulsion in the first place
but what is the photon made of, what is it
the photon isn't made of any smaller things, neither is the electron
both are localized oscillations in their respetive fields
then how come part of the electron become a photon, sm doesnt add up here
well that's not quite what is happening
can u help me with functions homework
!help
To ask for mathematics help on this server, please open your own help channel or help thread. See #❓how-to-get-help for instructions.
like mathematically speaking there are two fields, let's call them the electron field and the photon field. These two fields are coupled and influence each other
trying to find a good picture for this
just for reference here a field is a function that takes in a spacetime coordinate and spits out some scalar or vector or tensor or whatever
different fields model different particles and their interactions are tracked by an object called the lagrangian
right the electron field is more complicated, it's a little easier to say what is happening with the photon field without lying so much and then you can imagine a similar thing happens with the photon field
I'm trying to avoid saying too many big math words here and just giving some intuition
but like imagine the photon field as like the surface of the ocean, with a bunch of random waves and oscillations
I see
when you have some actual localized wave in this field, that is a photon
photons are localized standing waves like this, which propagate in some direction at the speed of propagation in this field (the speed of light)
electrons are like this too, they are standing waves in their field
(it is just more complicated for electrons because rather than the field being something simple like a number at every point of space, it's some vector or tensor, so harder to picture)
the point is these fields are coupled
for electrons it's even worse because they're spinors lol
the photons are vector valued but the electrons are uhhhhhhh

so certain things happening in the electron field can kick off an oscillation like this in the photon field, and vice versa
when an electron emits/absorbs a photon like this, that's what is happening
i see
you have some oscillation in the electron field which kicks off some oscillation in the photon field
this is true of basically every kind of particle and force in quantum field theory
each particle has its own field
when two particles interact, it's because their respetive fields are coupled, and oscillations in one field induce oscillations in the other
that makes sense
Does wave stuff still work with these localized waves? This explains the double-split experiment
are the existance of these fields function proven by empirical evidence ?
right exactly this is why you get double slit behavior: everything is waves
yes in the sense that the most accurate predictions of pretty much everything in nature at very small scales is accurately described by the mathematics coming from this picture
It is just a theory
I guess there is a philosophical question of like
is this actually real, or do we just have a very nice mathematical picture that seems to describe everything accurately
i think we assume models may be wrong, but that it works within our system
There's a big thing in physics that like these fields can't be directly measure for one reason or another
There's some physical bullshit involves that I forget now but we can detect the excitations of these field (ala we can detect that particles)
it works well enough to be incredibly useful at making predictions about how the world behaves, which is useful wisdom I suppose
but for example vortual particles aren't really "real"
nevertheless they do help us a lot with computing things like this
You know that some physicists alse believe that photons don't exist either lmfao
Not joking btw
mhm, I see
like suppose you want to compute some mathematical details of how two electrons repel each other
the picture we have in terms of virtual particles which seems to work even if it's not literally real is like
you compute the probabilities (or "scattering amplitudes") for every possible way that these two electrons can exchange a virtual photon
the simplest way is they just exchange a virtual photon, as in this Feynman diagram
from this Feynman diagram there is some recipe for writing down some complicated integral which basically tells you the probability of this exchange happening
but there are more complicated ways you can scatter
Intresting work
at a conceptual level you just need to know that charge, mass, and baryon/lepton etc numbers are conserved
also strangeness is conserved in non-weak interactions
and like how to read it, so time in that diagram is going up
like the next most complicated thing is like, photon is emitted, it spontaneously creates a virtual electron/positron pair, those annihilate back into a photon, etc
these possible scatterings get like, arbitrarily complicated, but more complicated scatterings become less and less likely
yeah I heard about infinite sums arising due to this reason
what seems to work in practice is that you compute the probabilities for enough different possible ways to scatter like this, and you get predictions that seem to match what happens in reality
and that counting all the possible ways requires you to be extra, super methodical
well right and part of the reason why this "perturbative" computation works so nicely for electromagnetism is like
the coupling constant is the fine structure constant, which is roughly 1/137, which is a small number
when you go to higher and higher order scatterings, the probabilities are scaled by powers of this coupling constant
so by the time you're at some 10th order thing, your probabilities are scaled by like (1/137)^10
So, you are saying that when two electrons repel each other. There are infinite ways they can do this?
indeed there are infinitely many ways
The theory of QED predicts a relationship between the dimensionless magnetic moment of the electron and the fine-structure constant α (the magnetic moment of the electron is also referred to as the electron g-factor ge). One of the most precise values of α obtained experimentally (as of 2023) is based on a measurement of ge using a one-electron so-called "quantum cyclotron" apparatus,[12] together with a calculation via the theory of QED that involved 12672 tenth-order Feynman diagrams
wow
but because the probabilities decay very rapidly with the complexity of scattering, you only have to do finitely many computations to get some desired numerical accuracy
this is why this sort of method of Feynman amplitudes works VERY POORLY for something like the strong force
the coupling constant is 1
ohhhhhh
so the probabilities don't quite decay like this anymore
but in some sense this perturbative computation with Feynman diagrams like this is just a mathematical trick, it's not really "real" or "honest" to what is actually happening, it just seems to work in practice in lots of examples
if one is being more "honest" you would compute these things more directly
this is what people tend to do when working with the strong force, where these perturbative computations don't work so well anymore
in those situations, people tend to do things like lattice QCD
like virtual particles aren't really real, but the fields are real
damn you seem to have quite the background in physics
if you want to just compute what the fields are doing directly you might try to do this by discretizing the problem, and pretending the world exists on a lattice
I think some people in the physics community might also argue whether or not fields are actually physical because we can't really measure them directly
and then you try to model what the actual fields are doing on some lattice with discrete length intervals
that's a question for philosophy
yeah but anytime you ask "what's real in physics" you enter the realm of philosophy
hence the name natural philosophy
if we had an INSANE amount of computing power you could take the length intervals in this lattice to be close to the Planck length and probably you would get something which is pretty much indistinguishable to modelling reality, but in practice you never need to work at such fine scales
meh
I have a casual interest in this stuff and read about it when I'm bored, but I can't do a lot of the computations that actual physicists can do easily
also what I'm saying is almost certainly not 100% accurate, what tends to happen is I yap about this stuff and it sounds like I know what I'm talking about, but when actual physicists are watching there are quite a few minor corrections that end up being made
It's better that you don't do these calculations
This is what my QFT hw looked like when I was taking that class

hell on earth
the heck is that
@flat harbor
can confirm?
This looks like someone is casting magic
you should see ng's integrals
lol honestly as bad as the shit I do is, it's definitely not worse than this
I remember deltoid sending me a paper about NT and it had cursed sums and integrals
I took a peek and said "nope im good"

a lot of the modern computations that physicists do with Feynman amplitides are done on computing clusters and involve millions of integrals
there is some very nice motivic stuff around Feynman amplitudes though
true
I have studied some of this from that perspective
feynman amplitude and their corresponding graphs
why isnt my gif gifing
Oh yeah I remember seeing something on the arxiv about this but never read too much into it
there is a nice story of how the motivic Galois group (or some quotient of it, the amusingly named Cosmic Galois group) acts on these Feynman amplitudes
and that action very nicely explains some very spooky numerical coincidences that exist between these amplitudes
omfg yes
I found another paper but it was more algebraic and MUCH BETTER. they got the same results
Analysts took the L this time
there is a very nice dream of like, in some sense most of these amplitudes are redundant, and computations would be much simpler if somehow you only had to compute a small handful of "master amplitudes" and then understood how the action of this motivic Galois group turns these "master amplitudes" into general ones
I understand nothing but I at least react cuz funny
like there are a huge number of amplitudes involving the number \zeta(3), up to some rational number
maybe these all come from the same "master amplitude" (say the simplest one proportional to \zeta(3)) and the particular rational multiple is what this group action determines
there are some toy examples where you can make this sort of idea precise, like for \phi^4 theory
pretty
these kind of numerical constraints are pretty striking, and optimistically one could use them to massively save on computation
what the
is this stuff
physics \cap number theory 
yeah unironically this stuff is very fun
thank you nG
I want to learn more about graph cohomology stuff
Graph cohomology owo
my advisor has been thinking more about this stuff recently
as have Francis and other people
cohomology would only make sense for like
well the first two
unless im missing something
At least for homology
by "graph (co)homology" I mean something pretty specific
it's very easy to define but really hard to compute
you take the Q-vector space generated by connected graphs with orientation, say with no vertices of degree \leq 2, and no tadpoles (loops on a single vertex)
Oh so you are taking a Directed graph?
undirected
oh so undirected but you put in orientation cuz cohomology
no loops -> simple graph?
I mean you can have loops, just not self-loops based at a single vertex
like this is still fine
oh gotcha
an orientation here is just an ordering on the set of edges of such a graph, one way to say this is like
$\eta\in(\wedge^{e_G}\mathbb{Z}^{E_G})^\times$
nGroupoid
where E_G is the set of edges with cardinality e_G
wtf
like if e_1,...,e_n are the edges of your graph G
then e_1\wedge...\wedge e_n is an orientation
what is wedge?
quite literally the wedge product
the point that matters is that if you swap the order of any two edges you pick up a minus sign
ok I thought it was something esoteric
so any other orientation is equal to either e_1\wedge...\wedge e_n itself, or its negative
you take this big Q-vector space generated by pairs (G,\eta) where G is a connected graph and \eta is an orientation, with no tadpoles or vertices of degree \leq 2
okay fair
you mod out by some simple equivalence relations like (G,-\eta)=-(G,\eta) and (G,\eta)=(G',\eta') whenever you have a graph isomorphism G->G'
this vector space is naturally graded or bigraded by like, loop number and degree
the loop number h_G is self explanatory
the degree deg_N(G) is a little funny, it's deg_N(G)=e_G-N*h_G, where N is some integer you fix
for N=0 this deg_N is just the number of edges
let GC_N be this resulting Q-vector space bigraded by loop number h and degree deg_N (so it's always the same underlying vector space no matter what N is, just the bigrading changes as N changes)
now define a differential on this guy:
G//e is the contraction of an edge e in a graph G
so your differential is sort of the most obvious thing you could think of: you're taking the alternating sum of contractions of edges with the induced orientation
graph homology is ker(d)/im(d) for this differential, it's again bigraded by loop number h and degree deg_N
interesting
it's generated by these wheel graphs (the red entries)
there is a natural structure of a Lie algebra on this H_0, and the wheel graphs give you generators for this
so for example the generator in degree 8 (in black) is the bracket [W_3,W_5] of the 3-spoke wheel generator W_3 and the 5-spoke wheel generator W_5, etc
but the H_n for n>0 are like, really insanely mysterious
since you like M_{g,n} you will be VERY pleased to know that any time you have a nontrivial class in graph cohomology, it produces a nontrivial cohomology class on M_{g,n}
for example the 3-spoke wheel class W_3 corresponds to the fact that H^6(M_3,Q)=Q(-6)
this also gives some indication of how complicated you should expect graph homology to be, since the cohomology of M_g is also awfully complicated
there is a tight relation between the story for H_0 and multizetas actually
like the wheels with 2n+1 spokes which generate H_0 as a Lie algebra correspond to the odd zeta values \zeta(2n+1) in a precise sense
their brackets correspond to multizetas, e.g. the generator [W_3,W_5] in degree 8 corresponds to \zeta(3,5)
but it's not so clear what the H_n for n>0 means in terms of periods
oh wtf
WOW WTF
YEAH
this is the paper that I am pulling from, it's a fantastic read, as all of Francis' papers are https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.04419
We study differential forms on an algebraic compactification of a moduli space of metric graphs. Canonical examples of such forms are obtained by pulling back invariant differentials along a tropical Torelli map. The invariant differential forms in question generate the stable real cohomology of the general linear group, as shown by Borel. By in...
if you go to Francis' arxiv his 4 most recent papers are on this too
he's been doing some stuff with like, the cohomology of A_g and the cohomology of locally symmetric spaces for GL_n(Z) and SL_n(Z) and their relation to graph complexes like this
e.g. you can use these techniques to show that dim H^{2g+k}_c(A_g) grows at least exponentially in g for k=0 and for all but finitely many integers k>0, since we know the corresponding exponential growth statements for graph homology
the fun thing about this paper is it gives you some Feynman amplitude techniques for showing that certain classes in graph homology are nontrivial
if you have a candidate for a nontrivial class it's very easy to check that it is in the kernel of d, but very hard to check that it it isn't in the image of d
but with the techniques here you can attach a Feynman amplitude to this graph, and if that amplitude is nonzero then your class is nontrivial
there is a paper my advisor wants me to finish now which plays a similar game with moduli of K3 surfaces
We study the topology of a space parametrizing stable tropical curves of genus g with volume 1, showing that its reduced rational homology is canonically identified with both the top weight cohomology of M_g and also with the genus g part of the homology of Kontsevich's graph complex. Using a theorem of Willwacher relating this graph complex to ...
this is kind of the original paper that develops these methods and they apply to lots of other moduli spaces not just M_g
the mechanism that relates M_g to the graph complex is like, you have a proper morphism of topological spaces M_g->M^trop_g to the moduli of tropical curves
you get a space \Delta_g which parameterizes isomorphism classes of genus g tropical curves of volume 1; it is homeomorphic on one hand to the link of the vertex in M^trop_g, and on the other hand to the dual complex of the boundary divisor in \bar{M}_g
the top weight cohomology of M_g is isomorphic to the reduced homology of this \Delta_g
but then the reduced homology of this \Delta_g is isomorphic to graph homology
whats so bad abt computing integrals
tropical curves definitely have a much more graph theoretic flavor to them, so that's maybe why it's reasonable that this approach relates this to graph homology
nothing
I love computing integrals
I love computing integrals
TO A NUNNERY, GO!
in the case of moduli of K3 surfaces I'm just kind of working with what I know of the boundary of the moduli directly, so I'm skipping most of this story
you're studying motives and M_{g,n} you're already a geometer
good morn
wtf
Can sum1 please share their physical paper notes in where you are working with rational numbers with hella equations within them, bc I'm convinced that it's impossible to write rational numbers between the line margins on paper.
Note sure where to post this but can anyone who’s familiar with John Conway’s Free Will Theorem give me a tl;dw? If John Conway wants to believe in free will, why isn’t he just a compatibilist? https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLy6vjBBz_zHSq7btLIDoPDQjfoq4kKT2e&si=nscAI7ZhdqLJwXXk
i always used printer paper for math, highly recommend. loose leaf/lined paper is for english class or grade school 
just stop using lined paper 
or use lined paper where the lines are light enough that it doesn't look horrendous if you write between them
if you can't stand blank paper dotted paper is a good alternative
doesn't have distracting lines like lined or graph paper, but still has a dot grid for when you need this
speaking of, i just got another dot notebook
yesss
i've started using this at your suggestion
i'm not skilled enough to use blank paper 
anyway it does the trick
yes it takes some practice if you're not used to writing with training wheels
but it gets better and it's worth sticking with it
my handwriting is so bad i've resorted to using large spacing and writing REALLY SLOW and REALLY BIG
at least when submitting stuff for other people to reaad
i'm basically a 3rd grader
we don’t talk about my handwriting
oh no
can I see tho
give me a sentence to write
higher should be more confident in their handwriting
here’s both
This isn’t that bad
here’s smth I wrote yesterday
I guarantee you what I wrote for my psets was like your handwriting
maybe better since I had to stop and think, so neater
but yes I did all of them on paper
this is a better notebook than the one I used for my psets
the writing looks a little nicer
I honestly should’ve just tore the pages out of the notebook when I used to write my solutions there
it probably would’ve helped
here's my handwriting under normal conditions lol
i've been told it's readable with some effort
I can read it with nearly no effort
let's see
oh wow
same
I mean it helps the words are familiar cause topology or something
Now write mx'' = -k[x - A <stuff>] and get x'' + w0^2x = w0^2 A_x cos(wt) with w0^2 = k/m. This eq. is inhomogenous, so the <stuff> is a sum of a <primitive?> sol. and a homogenous solution
oh particular duh
yeah handwriting like this is what allows me to use a computer for my exams at uni
which will be very helpful for sociology
it was very useful in high school also
I got professionally assessed by an OT
pretty good
oh nice
I have to constantly stop and decipher words with your handwriting
even though I know it's about damping
yeah see that’s a bad sign
why does it look like the stereotypical Asian font???
i don't even know what that is 
but i'm happy someone called me asian
because i am the least asian asian person to exist
oh really
my korean vocabulary consists of the names of korean foods that my mom makes
I mean language is another thing
like do you feel connected to your Korean culture
it's okay if you don't
in terms of identity, who you feel on the inside
that's what I mean
i don't feel super connected to it
though i'm told koreans love pork and i share this 👍
JOKBAL
honestly if you watch KoreanEnglishman + Jolly you might unironically gain some Korean culture
oh wait i've seen stuff from jolly
nice
I've watched this also and it hit me in the feels
it's designed to be relatable to AAPI people in general
but like since you're actually (half) Korean
hmm
MAMORU
don't post unsolicited advertisements here, we also discourage paid services in general
what's this notation
probably real part
yea thats real part
@ornate copper are u from france?
I'm from Thaïlande
ther' no way
where do i buy nonvisual geometry and topology 🧐
ok i was a bit worried about this "MyCopy" thing (i really don't trust springer, for good reason), turns out they've changed the aspect ratio, stretching every page vertically by a factor of 2.4 %, which us just enough to be quite clearly visible. i guess to fit this "MyCopy" banner on the front page 
bro got that image ai writing
the what
writing generated in an AI image
bro on his way to midjourney
boooohhhhhh
all that jazzz for nada
you can insult mine anytime 
yeah who doesnt
ok
simple challenge
take 2 squares and a plane that goes from 0 to infinity. at 0, there is an immovable wall. if square 1 has a mass of 1 gram and is sitting between 4 and 6 with an initial velocity of 0, and square 2 has a mass of 100 and initial velocity of -1, how many times will mass 2 collide with mass 1? remember, mass 2 will push mass 1 againtst the immovable wall. this is a perfect enviroment with 0 friction, 0 air resistance. calculate this in python.
Is this the goofy pi collision algorithm again
again??
Idk I've seen it kind of often
where is the code for it in python
Zero clue on that front lmfao
bro simplist project euler question 😭 🙏
I saw this last on 3blue1brown so if you're curious you can go see what he did but idk
hello and good evening
I think you'd just use conservation of momentum normally and use elastic collisions
Good evening and hello
Tyler needs help with an elastic collision program problem thing on Python
I mean i don't think so but it's in the same general realm? Idfk
lmfao this is kinda crazy but i lowkey see it
There's a software channel but it'd kinda dead rn
i know some c++ but thats it
thank you
I know basic Python but I'm not sure how you'd implement the collisions
Because I have the physics skills of a toddler
just keep track of two velocities and while not (both positive and smaller is slower than larger) collide them appropriately
I"m trying to revive it
oh the actual software channel
yeah
there is also #1213610885277421588
that is more active
the appropriate collision is smaller gets reflected, if smaller is negative, and a normal elastic two-body collision otherwise (which u can solve in the general case by hand )
#computing-software is for math software if that's what you mean
stuff like matlab, mathematica, julia, prob packages like numpy/pandas to some extent
Oh
conserve momentum and energy separately
this gives you two equations in two unknowns which u can solve simultaneously
I understand like a grand total of zero of the conservation laws 😔 like the idea makes sense but the units don't
Like I understand some vague thing should be conserved through interactions, but not why that thing is kg m^2/s^2
u know energy is proprotional to square of velocity right
pandas is old news, i use ibis now 
and proportional to mass
Yep
thats good enough
whats ibis i heard of the polars is meant to be overtaking pandas but i never knew there was a multi way competition
But why conserved
Differentiate x^lnx wrt lnx
bcs of differential geometry or somrthing idrk its just like that
polars is nice and i used it for awhile, but the api is more verbose than pandas and kind of annoying to work with
ibis is a dataframe library that has a swappable backend (the default backend is polars, but you can swap that with about 20 databases, and it will convert your dataframes into sql queries)
really it's kind of doing something different in the sense that it's not implementing the dataframe execution code like polars
but it is a dataframe library and it's much nicer to use than polars imo
except the fact that it's relatively new
so the error messages and docs need some love
i also have never heard of either polars or ibis
not too deep into the data rabbit hole tbh
aanyway it's a godsend for me cuz i can use ibis which is a nice dataframe library, and have the backend be my company's user analytics database
so i can avoid writing gross clickhouse SQL code 
Anyone solving this??
and then you can use the same tool whether you're dealing with databases or just processing some data locally like you would with polars
or pandas
one of gods rules for the world is that energy is (not quite but very very almost) always conserved, we may never know exactly why. but there are mathematical situations where u can have conserved quantities appear see Noether theorem. and the conditions for an energy symmetry to appear are very very almost satisfied in real life, and exactly satisfied in simple models of real life, so "thats why" energy is conserved.
I got the answer.
Hint: swap x with some exponent raised to some logarithm
I tried
The answer that I get is (x^lnx).lnx but it is 2(x^lnx).lnx
Replace x with e^lnx, simplify, swap lnx with a dummy variable and differentiate
you get this if you let y=ln(x) and then differentiate w.r.t. y
Lemme try
But I wanna know :c
Can I get a solution?
If it's for homework, unfortunately no
It's not homework
what more do u wanna know !
Just a random question in my booklet
2ln(x)e^(ln(x)^2)
There has to be some reason that combination of units is conserved otherwise how does anything make sense
its nothing to do with the units, put it that way
there are other quantities with the same units that are not conserved
and other quantities that are conserved but have different units
Y=arcsinx/arccosx what does arc mean here?
please read #❓how-to-get-help
I got the correct results thanks for your time
yo just asked a question in the help chat. now i cant find it lol. is there a reason to that?
Yeah I do not know what I did wrong but all of my calculators are giving different answers so uhhh 
i solved it. when u substitute lnx for y you get e^{y^2}
then differentiating wrt y, u get 2y e^{y^2}
then substitute lnx back u get 2lnx x^lnx
yeah thats what i got 😔
e and 2 are numbers. e is euler's number. e ≈ 2.718281828…
ln is log with base e
x and y are variables
Is the khan academy digital sat good
Cuz i need to get better sat scores
Im from indonesia
yes
do you guys know what to study for the MMATHS
real analysis
wdym
you asked what to study for math
no like there is a competition called MMATHS
oh thank you
oh wow I didn't know
that's more for math questions fwiw but worth asking there ig
oh lol
thank you kind strangers
i agree this math server has the kindest strangers in any servers I've been
hiii chat
that's pretty sad, 'cause this server is often very ||never gonna give you up||
this comment really ||let me down||
sorry my intention was not to ||Never gonna run around and desert you||
this place hurts me
I bet it makes you cry
I'd stick around but I gotta say goodbye
I'm not gonna lie, sorry if I hurt you
LOL
please read #❓how-to-get-help
I thought it can be discussed here cuz it's not a formal question just a random thought
Sorry for bringing you trouble anyway, I've deleted
might be dumb but i just used dot products for animating something and i have never felt so validated for liking math holy shit IT ACTUALLY FUCKING WORKS
snot product 
im going to change my pro nouns to she her and ask for homework help a second time
that's how the internet works
source?
remember to put a cure anime picture and say uwu
dont know why this place is less chaotic than discussy

he was banned
yeah lmfao
doing one time read scanners is a pain
maybe I should take the L and do this with multiple loops
well not really an L but more of a pride L 
Hi guys I m sigma
hi $\sigma$
higher's secret twin brother
🫠
Σ
<@&268886789983436800>
please don’t do that
No I am the real sigma fuck off
I have been quarantined yet again
the real sigma being the friends you made along the way
all of your friends
hi
What are these weird looking symbols
U have
I don’t like this
Are u the one bullying me
sure!
aw
<@&268886789983436800>
<@&268886789983436800> advertisement
don’t advertise this here please.
yeah pretty cool
Lol the same statement inspired me to learn at
Rodbet is just like me

on a whole other note...
> continues idly looking through texts recommended by my logic prof
> finds actual fire scathing review of book recommended by prof
> review mentions invariance of domain
actually i've been having so much fun reading book reviews
this one is just amazing, it starts "That there is something wrong with the present teaching of mathematics is indisputable." and elaborates for a full page about the general state of things, before turning to the book under review, namely henle's an outline of set theory.. "Consider the actual historical development of set theory" following with another page quickly summarising this history, mentioning some key facts from analysis and topology that influenced the developments of set theory (among other things brouwer's proof of the invariance of domain) before the bombshell, quoting henle's version:

Other than to suggest that he be raked over the coals, or at least flogged, for the sentence about Euclid, I do not want to attack Prof. Henle for having written an unscholarly book
the quote from Henle is actual comedy though
lol, which book is that? 😅
holy shit smay is playing peak no way ?!
also, I was curious what book is this one about manifolds?
sorry it seems i accidentally overwrote half a sentence in my excitement fixed now
the PUP edition of Thurston's Geometry and topology of 3-manifolds
I see, thanks 
hi @void loom
Hi @eternal crow
ohh my name is reversed!
are u using an iphone
i see
android spells my name right to left
while ios is left to right
nope
android is left to right ans ios is right to left
@eternal crow
Sometimes I wonder why math professors wagecuck for like $150k/yr when they could make millions doing quant trading
wagecuck is crazy
your average math professor doesn’t know anything about quant trading
nor do they want to i imagine
Why don’t they at least be a software engineer at FAANG making twice their professor salary?
the blinders of obsession on basically a singular goal while ignoring everything except for a couple necessities
why the heck would someone with the brain of a math professor want to be a software engineer
idk i’d be very happy making $150k doing something i enjoy even slightly and wouldn’t want to do something i don’t enjoy much for more money
$150k is like, way more than enough for most people
unless you want to live in.... idk manhattan
Not in the Bay Area / NYC
why would [insert profession] not decide to do [completely different profession] 🤔
well then you can live in new jersey or something
and take the train
i doubt most math professors could get into faang anyway
i mean step 1 you have to like programming
which probably disqualifies a lot of them
few of my math professors know anything about programming
yea that sounds about right ig
Do they know discrete math at least
of course
and the kind of programming you do as a software engineer is pretty different from writing python programs to compute things
you have to get used to crawling around blindly in large codebases, sifting through layers of code to isolate bugs, writing lots of tests, designing interfaces, blah blah blah blah
boring stuff that math professors would probably hate
indeed
but the money
that would just make them instantly love it
did someone say money
i mean honestly i'll say that money definitely can change how you feel about something
i forgot who said it but
absolutely nobody would be passionate about tax law if they didn't get paid for it
it wouldn’t change much for me if i was already making enough
Coding is not even the worst part of working at FAANG
yeah $150k is plenty 

I would say dealing with quotas is worse
quotas?
And being forced to cut corners because you have deadlines
worst part for me was endless meetings
PIP quota
hi @thin canyon
bungo sir hello
oh some bs performance review stuff where they cut X% or whatever right
good evening layla ma'am
companies that do that are wild
I vaguely remember that manyzen
rank and yank ftw
ohhh ur back!
Hire to fire
and yes we're 4 now
idk let's see if they will tell
asinine, far better not to hire idiots in the first place
my coworker is sort of the de facto team lead on my team and he gets on our case when our standup meetings exceed 15 minutes
Toge is pretty inactive though he's probably focusing on some salt
he is right
now imagine having to sit in standups for 2 hours
i've heard it gets bad some places
Was it one of spam's friends?
They have to because that’s the only way they protect their “real” workers from getting fired
at one point i had more meeting time than work time in my weekly calendar
not sure. i feel like she was but im not sure
that's when i finally started declining meetings as my default response
my brother's fiancee sometimes just has meetings from the beginning of the day to the end
but she's an engineering manager so
that's her job ig
I see
brb
The main reason for the fall of manyland is that Philipp know nothing about math and he relies on ChatGPT too much
nightmare existence imo
i eventually got smart and blocked out 8am-1pm every day for "real work" but this designation was not visible publicly, it just showed me as not available
also this fucking entrance is hilarious 
Hypercapitalist bungo moment
word
oh bro
once I have my mvp
and I get those green bills
Ill bring rat to this hell hole
worst part is this shit is php

horror
He can squeeze 10 clock cycles out of a raw pointer allocation
im sure he can manage that shit

what was your title when you retired if u dont mind me asking
like how high up were you
when do i use NPQ or NP/Q
apple is sort of famously not into titles for individual contributors, everybody is either engineer or senior engineer unless you're like an apple fellow or whatever
but in terms of salary level i was ICT5
oh, interesting
Rip manyland!
just called "senior software engineer"
i am just a regular software engineer
when i gave my talk at this event a few weeks ago i was presenting next to ceo's and staff engineers 
my previous employer had all sorts of pretentious titles like "master engineer"
master engineer 
thats not pretentious
i was too embarrassed to put that on my resume or linkedin haha
There's saltfree that my @boreal sun kisser is working on
and there's offlineland but cow milks everyone who's using it
i just used my original title (senior principal) before they went over to that nomenclature
its for upper echelon folx
Is applied computation closer to math or software engineering?
and there's thingistan but it's an elitist circle
I do not want to join but thank you
no it's not
what is applied computation?
ask anyone in the industry no respectable engineer has the title "master engineer" 
back in the dot com days people had all sorts of stupid titles like "GUI czar"
for IC it's software engineer -> senior -> staff -> some combination of senior/staff/principal/distinguished/whatever
a friend of mine literally put "rocket scientist" on his business cards (back when people had business cards)
Computational science
i hope to make it to staff/principal one day
My company has fellow above distinguished
preferably not at a company with 10 people
go to a startup, there's plenty of title inflation there 🤣
see my next post 
ah yeah that too
yea this
Like Putnam fellow
some companies put things like technical director somewhere in between principal/distinguished/fellow
the heck is a putnam fellow
oh interesting, to me director sounds like management
that's only good when you can have the title technical director without having to manage anyone
yea avoid this
Someone who went/goes to a North American college and is good at math
i thought putnam fellow means you got one of the top 5 scores on the putnam exam
well that sounds different from engineering fellow ig
yea there are a lot more engineering fellows out there than putnam fellows haha
Have any of you ever met a Putnam fellow?
My landlord was 1 point off
median score of 0 or 1
reminds me of the kolmogorov 0-1 law
and what is an engineering fellow
But he got honorable mention
iirc fellow is basically the highest rank you can reach
without becoming something different altogether like an executive or smth
oh wow
i had to check the list of putnam fellows, i have met at least one of them (was my grad algebra professor)
oh nice
check these chads who won four times each (the maximum possible)
sheeeesh
Reid and Brian were on my landlord’s IMO team in high school
that's fairly typical, at many companies an engineering fellow is roughly comparable to a vice president in terms of stature and compensation
i see
but it varies depending on how many people they give the title to ig
looks like apple has had around 12 in its history, only one granted this century
jeeeez
and you're competing with woz himself if you want into that club
yea idk if im aiming for that lmao
it's already damn hard to get to ICT6, let alone distinguished or fellow
wait so if ICT5 was equivalent to senior principal, what is ICT6 if not distinguished
staff principal?
ICT6 means you have to be recognized throughout whatever larger org you're in (software engineering org in my case)
has woz done cool stuff since he retired from apple?
Is it impossible or nearly so to become fellow without a PhD?
oof no recognition
i dunno what title you'd give ICT6, it's above 5 and below distinguished
i only knew a few ICT6's
most people will never get above 4 or 5
James B. Keller (born 1958/1959) is an American microprocessor engineer best known for his work at AMD, Apple, and Tesla. He was the lead architect of the AMD K8 microarchitecture (including the original Athlon 64) and was involved in designing the Athlon (K7) and Apple A4/A5 processors. He was also the coauthor of the specifications for the x86...
sorry to dissapoint
he is THE microprocessor engineer
bachellors back then were built different I guess
well i guess maybe you don't need a phd just to become a rank and file microprocessor engineer.... but i imagine nowadays if you want to be near the top...
depends on how you define it ig
i'm sure there are many hundreds of people at intel and such who work on microprocessors, probably most don't have phd's
and if they're anything like the intel engineers i've had to deal with, they are idiots
we acquired their mobile semiconductor business and iirc we only kept 11% of their people
yea




