I would love to know what books you guys recommend both applications and theory for mathematics majors.
From programming languages to implementations to automata theory.
Pic related
SICP
Why the fuck is it Quadrant , shouldn't it be quadrant 2?
>>7811167
Fuck meant Quadrant 1 first
Post.
>>7810537
>3. So the manifold of F is undifferentiable.
Yeah, okay.
>>7810537
>If a manifold is differentiable then it is smooth
This is wrong.
>>7810560
>>7810553
It's still arguable. Ultimately, it is true that the polynomial equation that is differentiable is smooth, certainly in this particular case.
With reference to post 2, the relations of the manifold referred to in item 3 are similar to my first statement in this post.
More importantly, I do think that the intuitive type of statements in the pattern in the posted Hodge Conjecture proof is fun. However, only as playful activity. Really the proof is appropriate to this forum.
And so on. I thought we just joke on here?
Anyway, I am not going on here any more because the pattern of thinking on here as joking is just nasty and unreasonable - with reference to Christianity and rational interest and other types of valuable items.
Is it possible for magic to be real?
Only if wizards are using magic to make us muggled believe that the idea or magic is completely retarded and impossible
>>7810386
meme magic is real
>>7810386
No, then it wouldn't be magic, which it isn't
![Jacob-Barnett-1024x681-950x632[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kyE0IpE.jpg "Jacob-Barnett-1024x681-950x632[1]")
So what happened to this faggot? Why is there no news from him?
>>7810285
Just another retard who spent every day of his childhood learning maths at a ridiculous fast rate to please his parents and now that he made it to academia he is just another cog. Another small name in the lists that from time to time comes up with another published paper that will change nothing and no one will read. All for what? He could be have enjoyed his youth a bit more and then become what he is now but it is too late to think about that now. He has to publish another useless paper that literally no one will read or else he will get thrown out from whatever shithole he is currently in.
He's probably done more triple integrals than Newton did at his age. Don't you think he's done enough for science already?
>>7810297
>co-authoring 1 insignificant paper
>done enough for science already
Niga are you serious?
nonlinear functional analysis
what's it good for? can it answer significant questions in science and math?
my prof said learning it would make me emperor tier in the math community. is there any weight to this?
Its useful. Its interesting, and yes it has applications in physics theory and pde theory, as well as geometry and geometric analysis. I'm sure there's more. It won't make you 'emperor tier' at anything, its just another field of math, and one fairly useful to an analyst.
>>7809231
Isn't it the basis of Quantum Mechanics?
>emperor tier in the math community
>something that won't get grants because it's too abstract with no applications
Your Prof is an idiot if he actually told you to do this what your career. He should be telling you to get the fuck out of Pure Maths as soon as possible and get something that gives you some practical skills so you can leave Academia if you can't make it.
Which sadly, with the quality of teaching, projects and supervision. It will happen sooner rather than later for most people.
Wait, is this true?
It is supposedly true for all x, y, n, and m that are real.
>>7809002
This is actually kind of a big deal guys. Try to solve the equation
[math] 2^x + 3^x = 11[/math] without it. You need to use Taylor Series yes?
This equation kind of circumvents that, to an extent.
Some youtube guy from London claims to have made it.
>>7809002
Yes.
Because
[math]
\frac{log(1 + x^{ \frac {m log(y) } { logx } - n })}{log(x)} = log_x(1+log_x (y) - n)
[/math]
so
[math]
x^{n+log_x(1+x^{ m log_x(y) -n}= x^n*(1+\frac{y^m}{x^n}
[/math]
>>7809021
fixed last line:
[math]
x^{n + log_{x} ( 1 + x ^ { m log_{x}(y) - n})}= x ^ n*(1 + \frac{ y^m }{ x^n})
[/math]
Is /sci/ only math and physics?
http://www.strawpoll.me/6632918
Tell us your college major.
Materials Science and Metallurgy
>Not on the list
>>7808215
>http://www.strawpoll.me/6632918
>Computer science not on that list
I mean it probably wouldn't matter either they, they probably wouldn't figure out how to check the right box.
>>7808229
>they couldn't check the right box
And you are probably more or less blind
Good for maths and physics or not?
math no, physics maybe
>>7807881
I've pretty much done that all my uni years. how can this even have a fancy name, it's just common sense
>>7807881
Oh man, I remember this from middle and high school. Some classes actually forced us to take notes in this method.
Complete shit. Just take notes like a normal human being (everything in one section, spaced as you like as long as it's readable, no wasting time underlining or whatever).
What physical phenomenon limits the speed of light ?
>>7806677
>physica;
gralvity
>>7806677
the speed of causality.
>>7806677
Earth, fire, air, and water
Hey guys, I figured out how to calculate a decimal to octal however I stumbled upon an issue.
Once I have a number with no residual value I get zeroes which means I get the wrong idea I guess.
So can you guys explain it to me with a number that has no remainder, let's say 72?
>>7811006
nein
>>7811017
Please i'm fucked at my test tomorrow, it's the only thing I fail to understand
bump, I am curious too
pls explain
Just wondering whether or not I'm correct, it's bugging me:
1/3 + 2x/x-1 = 5/6 - 2/1-x
The answer I got was x=1, can anyone confirm?
>>7810901
yep, seems right.
>>7810927
it's 2x/x-1, the input was wrong, but damn that site is good, lemme try it :O
When I flip a coin, why is there a higher chance that it'll land on the opposite side next flip?
>>7810816
There isn't.
>>7810822
If I flip it 100 times and they all turn out as heads, are the chances that the next flip will be tails higher?
>>7810826
No.
Is cosmology theory a meme subfield? Applying to grad schools next year, I have only ~2 years in research experience (in physics) and no fancy double degree in math, grad-level physics classes, etc. so even though I'd like to get into hep-th I doubt I have the qualifications. Honestly though I really just want to learn and work with the big theories (GR and QFT).
Also, side question for whoever may know - I checked out Caltech's requirements (huge stretch already I know) and under the question "What level of undergraduate preparation is necessary for admission?" the answer is basically that applicants should have already taken grad-level physics and undergrad analysis. Are they serious, and is this common at top 10 programs? I mean, even for experimentalists, do they really expect exposure to real analysis?
Sorry if I'm sounding bitchy, just kinda scared for my future right now. I'm already considering doing a masters (to get this "required" grad-level exposure) but I really, really don't want to.
>>7810752
You are absolutely sounding bitchy if you're complaining about baby real analysis of all things.
The math eventually required is so much more intricate and high-level that you'll wish you're doing baby's first Cauchy sequences again.
>Is cosmology theory a meme subfield?
No. In some aspects it's a lot like particle physics but the time lines are a bit different. 30 years ago there was still big debate going on and hot new theory was being produced. Observations sucked however. In the past decade though, like particle physics, the standard model (of cosmology) has become irritatingly good. The field simply isn't developing as it once was so theory is either in the subtle details or is working on speculative models. Observational cosmology progresses but again, not like it once did. Observation is now very technical as large innovation in methods is few and far between (also like particle physics). Observers have the benefit that they can also do galaxy evolution (most of them) which is related but much more poorly understood.
It is an interesting and big field but it depends what part you get into. Some field within it are saturated and you will struggle to have an original idea.
>>7810783
Sorry senpai
It's not that I dislike real math or anything, I've even self-studied out of Rosenlicht and Krantz (mostly the former) that my friend gave me, but I just don't have the space to take a formal course in analysis here (not to make another excuse; if I could go back two years and change my plans I would, but that's just how it is for now).
>>7810789
Alright, thanks for the perspective, that's just what I was looking for. Obviously I'll be talking to my advisers about this once school opens up again but that helped me get my thought processes running clearer.
help me out sci, what's the name of that perfect encryption whereby you agree to a key beforehand and the only viable method of decryption is finding the key ?
it's quite a simple one if I remember right
Do you mean worm ? Thats quite an old program. You enter a password and it generates a multi layered combination alghoritm thats basically un-backtraceable.
>>7810571
One time pad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-time_pad
>>7810577
thank you based anon
