New stupid questions thread, old one maxed out

I think you mean all the laws will still hold. But yes you need to prove closure under all operations.

linearity doesn't just come for free for an arbitrary subset of a vector space, that's why it's in the definition of a subspace, you need to check it every time

identify 2x2 matrices with 4 component vectors, say via an isomorphism F,
thus
F( [a b] ) = [a, b, c, d]^T
( [c d] )

then your V is simply the kernel of the linear map given by the matrix [1 1 1 0].

kernels are always subspaces, so you're done

Hey guys I have to do research(6 months) in Chemistry and I have no clue where to begin!

Could any of y'all provide some kind of advice?
Possibly hint at some topic in Organic Chemistry!

Im an undergrad so please keep things as simple as possible!

I'm doing the following problem:
Let [math] n \in \mathbb { Z } ^{ + } ~ \text { and } ~ p_n : S^1 \to S^1 [/math] be defined by treating [math] S^1 \subset \mathbb { C } [/math] and the formula [math] p_n (z) = z^n [/math]. From the definition (i.e. without using the embeding in [math] \mathbb { C } [/math] ) show that [math] p_n [/math] is smooth.

I'm not really sure where to go with this, other than to try and show that it's [math] C^1 [/math] (and it's smoothness would follow from that). But I'm not sure how to do that, I thought that I'd just show that [math] p_n [/math] was complex differentiable and continuous. But it tells you not to use the embedding in C. So I've no idea where to go from here.

>without using the embeding in CC

...how do you define S^1 then? The formula itself is in terms of complex numbers.

If it's R/Z it's a consequence of addition in R being continuous plus something about the map R -> R/Z.

Hey Im a first year physics student, I think I did something in my notes wrong. I'm trying to calculate the voltage between two charged plates. Im given that they are seperated by 4 cm, and that a proton in between them experiances a force of 1.28*10^-16 N

I ended up getting 1600 Volts.

Basically I took Fe=q*E and then solved for E, then plugged E into the equation P*E=Fe*y where y is displacement, Fe is the force on the proton, P is the potential difference/voltage, and I honestly don't know what E is. Strength of the field? or is it part of P and not a separate unit?

How does the sun burn if there's no oxygen in space

non-Veeky Forumsentist here. How can I better understand academic and statistical studies? I don't want to author them myself, just be able to read them.

I'm tired of going to secondary sources for information, I want to be able to confirm the info myself, but they often boggle my brain. Is there a field of study that lays out the terminology and standards for academic studies? A website or Youtube series maybe?

I don't even know what the field would be called, so I'm having trouble finding anything on it. Sorry if this is exceedingly stupid.

I think this might be a troll but if not, it is not actually burning. It is fusing hydrogen together to form helium.

I suck at these, what method is used to solve this?

On the Mandelbrot set.
Why f^n(0) will always tend to the fixpoint z* as n ->infinity if f'(z*)

Just make a venn diagram, dumbass.

What does they mean with "fist class degree in physics" in UK? it was the admission requirements for a phd position.

They mean that the degree certifies that you know how to use the verb "do" correctly.

That do mean that you does not get in.

>First = 70+%

Normally.

heh, English is not my first language but I know that it is "does" only for the 3th person singular, in that post "does" was more a typo than anything else.
Also, I just started my master's degree so I still have at least two years before I get to see my phd admission rejected (yeah).
Anyway, isn't "you does not get in" incorrect as well?

>First = 70+%
I suppose that's something related to the grade distribution among the student population.
So in that case my university must provide some kind of document which certifies that I am between the 30% best students in my course?

>Anyway, isn't "you does not get in" incorrect as well?
yes

Swen is a hero, and the town has gone mad due to poisoned water. Swen happens to have unpoisoned water on tap, but the town is currently blaming Swen's water as the source of the madness. Swen knows his water is unpoisoned, and that the townsfolk's central well is poisoned. But they are so crazy they don't understand science. What should Swen do? Should he migrate into the groupthink regarding the water supplies? Should Swen throw out his last remaining bottles of truly pure, undrugged water, and carry on drinking from the community fountain? After all, Swen is the only known case, and once his own water supply was depleted, why, he'll become like everybody else.

How does it feel living in the 21st century? Must be marvelous. There's fluoride in the water. But that's the American way. Yet underneath it all, there's an unceasing drumbeat. It is the sound of your heart. It mimics the sound of your mother's heart. Hers mimics the sound of her mother's heart. And that chain goes uninterrupted about 100,000 years. That's a long time.

So, what's my question?

How does it feel living in the 21st century?

Is this a valid proof?
Quotient law for convergent sequence:
If the limits of the sequences and [math]\{b_n\}[/math] is convergent, that is [math]\lim_{n \to \infty}b_n = B [/math] and that [math]\lim_{n \to \infty } b_n \neq 0[/math], then [math]\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{b_n}=\frac{1}{B}[/math].
Let [math]\epsilon > 0[/math], such that [math]n \geq N[/math], then [math]|\frac{1}{B} - \frac{1}{b_n}| < \epsilon[/math].
Now, since [math]{b_n}[/math] is convergent to the limit B, at some point [math]|B-b_n| < |B^2|.\epsilon[/math]
Doing some algebraic manipulation and inequalities, we get:
[eqn]|\frac{1}{B} - \frac{1}{b_n}| = |\frac{b_n - B}{B.b_n}| \leq |b_n - B| |\frac{1}{B.b_n}| = |B - b_n||\frac{1}{B.b_n}| < |B^2|.\epsilon.\frac{1}{|B^2|} = \epsilon[/eqn]

How can I tell if a paper I found online is complete bullshit or not? Everything about the scientific literature looks so shady, and I wouldn't be surprised if anybody off the street could write up something that looks legitimate enough and publish it if they found the right journal or whatever.

Hello, I am doing 7/8x = -1/2

and Ive come up with 1x = 8/14

Is this correct? I cant for the life of me seem to remember math. This is my college homework.

Actually I meant to say 1x = -8/14

You could have atleast included /sqt/ in the subject field

>use your knowledge on the matter.
>check what other experts think about it.
>congratulation! you've learned about the "peer reviewed process"
>???
>profit

1/2 = 1/3x +4/15

What do??

Wonderful. Next question?

symbolab.com/solver/step-by-step/1/2 = 1/3x +4/15

Given a inequality of fractions with a bunch of variables, how do I know which side is bigger?
Like:
[math]\frac{n^3}{3}-\frac{n^2}{2}+\frac{n+6n^2}{6} < \frac{n^3+3n^2}{3}[/math]
How can I know that the left side is bigger for n > 1?

if they don't want you to use the embedding, the only thing you can do is pick an atlas of S^1 (i.e. a collection of maps f: [math]U\to S^1[/math], where U is an open subset of R, satisfying the requisite compatibility conditions), and then show that the composition [math]p_n\circ f[/math] is a smooth function, for each function f in the atlast

ask someone whose opinion you trust, like a professor

some related reading, if you're interested:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_affair

Assume epsilon greater than 0, not let.

You have to find a tail N before you assume n >= N.

To find the tail, you have to remove the absolute value bars.

If you don't follow the definition of convergence in order, you won't get something that makes sense.

If I submitted that as a proof, I would get a 0.

...

Resistance is current (I) over voltage (V), right? I'm reading something that says that the slope of the graph of voltage vs current is equal to the resistance, but that doesn't make much sense. I'm looking at a graph, and if you divide the voltage (x values) by the currents (y-values), you get really high numbers, but the slope of the line is really small.

partial fraction decomposition

If a paper is controversial enough it'll generally have other teams of researchers commenting on it, either to refute or support its claims. You can get a lot of insight toward the scientific process through these comments alone.

An in depth study of what happens to slugs when you pours salt on them. Simple enough?

Thanks

When talking about context-free languages,
is:
{a^n a^n b^n b^n: n>=0}
functionally the same as
{a^2n b^2n: n>=0}?

What is a wave function, and what does it mean when one "collapses"? The extent of my physics learning is 2 intro semesters of physics so if a brainlet answer is necessary that would be cool.

The only knowledge I have of them is in their use to predict electric density probability around a nucleus. Is it true that the wave function "collapses" at the nodes of orbitals, or is that a misunderstanding I have?

Take x common from the numerator and the denominator, and substitute 1/x by u

electron*

VDD = 1.2V

VOV4 = 75mV

Vth4 = 400mV

VDS3 = 150mV

VB = ???

Get them all under a common denominator.
Then check when denominator is positive/negative, and go from there

The wave function contains information about the particle. Integrating it over the space in which it can exist gives you a distribution of where the particle is likely to be. In order to observe something is to say you obtain information about it. When you see something, light has to be absorbed / reflected from the thing and re emitted to your eye. Since the thing in question is a wave, and light is a wave, they interfere with each other. This interference changes the distribution to a much sharper peak. So that after the particle - photon interaction, the particle being described by the wave function is much much more likely to be in some spot than another. If it wasn't in that spot, the light wave / photon couldn't interact with it.

This can be generalized to 3d. The orbitals / shells are the places you'll most likely see an electron if you observe it.

yes

No one really knows for sure what wave function collapse means. The idea is that, prior to measurement, there is a probability distribution (wave function) for what observations you will see. Then, upon measurement, you will get a definite outcome, and it will stay that way if you measure again after a short period of time. Since it now has a definite value, we say the wave function "collapses."

um, someone please explain this:

A is moving away 0.7c from B, who's standing on earth. I get that in special relativity, A experiences time dilation. When B observes A, he sees that A's clock is moving slower.

But, isn't it also the opposite? Isn't B going 0.7c away from B, so that B also experiences time dilation?

meant to say:
Isn't B going 0.7c away from A, so that B also experiences time dilation?

I am a double bachelor student studying both chemistry and physics, second year
tell me
I also have the possibility of adding mathematics aswell, which I like and I've already done some of the required courses for the first year
should I go for the triple bachelor Veeky Forums?

Depends if you think if you really need it. You run the risk of becoming overqualified to be honest. But if you like it and you think you can put up with the workload I'd say go for it. Respect for people that can handle so much shit my man

you seem to know your shit
what level is this
what level are you

a wizard?

mein nigger

how is overqualified a problem desu?
it's not that hard desu, it'll just take fuckloads of time to do all the reading and make the homework

Veeky Forums's opinion on DMT?

If a an object is moving at 10m/s and it starts braking at 2m/s/s how far will it travel before reaching 0m/s speed?
I don't need the result, i just need to know how to calculate it, i found this on google (10^2)/(2*2) but it gives bullshit results

Formula for constant acceleration is [math]v_{final}^2 = v_{init}^2 +2 * a* d[/math]
in your scenario [math]v_{final}^2 = 2 * a* d[/math], and after solving for the distance [math]d = -\frac{v_{init}^2}{2 * a}[/math].

[math]d = -\frac{v_{init}^2}{2 * a} = -\frac{(10m/s)^2}{2 * -2m/s^2} = 25m [/math]

Thanks, so that equation gave me the correct result after all. (I assumed it was wrong since 10+8+6+4+2 is 30, not 25)

both incorrect if the x is in the denominator. is it?

I can't figure out how to parameterize the boundary conditions of this pde

The equation is:
y(du/dx) +x(du/dy) = xy

With conditions:
In the region x>0, y>0
When x=0, u(0,y) = exp(-y^2)
When y=0, u(x,0)=exp(-x^2)

I'm mostly having trouble figuring out how to parameterize in general, but this problem is specifically throwing me off right now.

what's a better way to dispose of a body? if i packed it into my suitcase and buried it would that make it harder to find than if it just decomposed after being buried directly in the ground?

Help me my dudes

In my final year of med school I have to do research stuff. to what extent will be I allowed to explore? I'd rather research something abstract that hasn't really been done before rather than some generic gene carrier protein research

Not sure if bait, but for sure my teacher won't allow me to do anything where I have to test on animals

Question to anyone who's studying microbiology
I start uni in 15 months, majoring microbiology most likely.

Any things you regret not doing before you started uni?

Any subjects you can suggest I ought to familiarise myself with now?

any tips would be appreciated

Starting in a few weeks so excited. Can someone tell me
1. Which programming languages will be taught except MATLAB if I'm doing mechE?
2. Where will I be able to intern during first break? Also how hard will it be to find one? Not autistic btw

I'm sorry if this sounds like a dumb question

assuming that there is an object going down a slope, where
[math]
R = kv^2
F = mg\cos(\theta)\mu
F_{net} = mg\sin(\theta) - R - F
[/math]

How do I find the velocity/acceleration at any given time. I assume that there is a need to integrate

[math]
a = \frac{mg\sin(\theta)-mg\cos(\theta)}{m}
[/math]

But I'm not sure what to do with the air resistance

Idk what class your doing this in, but you have to use delta epsilon proofs in real and complex analysis.

I'm done with all that, just finishing a physics minor.

learn genetics

>a=mgsin(θ)−mgcos(θ)m
This formula is wrong. mgcos(theta) should be replaced with (mu)mgcos(theta)

Yes, this is true.
There's also length contraction.

If you put the two together, each observer would disagree the times each other ages. This is resolved using doppler shift for light

Friction causes two objects to transfer electrons, the result being two objects of opposite charges attracted to each other, is that why sex feels good?

Ah my bad I didn't see that. Is there a need for me to factor air resistance into that equation?

Not really.

Sex feels good for the same reason your your fingers hurt if you crush them with a hammer.

Your nervous system transfers electrical signals to the brain wihich causes the release of certain chemicals.

>Be me
>Write code for some quantum simulation
>Program crashes, some dimensions don't fit
>Put print statements around the problematic piece of code for debugging
>Run program again
>It prints the correct dimensions, no error message but the program simply freezes instead
>mfw I realize my observation changed the outcome
>This is more quantum than I can handle

How is this shit even possible?

1. are A and B equivalent?
2. are C and D?
i suspect yes for 1 and no for 2

i did this shit in highschool and now 1 year later in college i forgot all of it

Use a proper debugger instead of print statements, it saves you a lot of sanity.

Yes for both

Does there exist two continuous periodic functions with fundamental periods x and y such that their sum is a continuous periodic function with a fundamental period less than x and y? What about greater than x and y?

i dont know for <
2y=3x is an example for period > x,y
try to think of your own example

Please, I really need it

Air resistance will have only a small and therefore negligable effect on the object if it is sufficiently heavy

On the Mandelbrot set.
Why f^n(0) will always tend to the fixpoint z* as n ->infinity if f'(z*)

What does the =~ symbol mean?

Pls respond

What you're looking for is an introductory statistics book. Literally all of the requisite material you would need to understand it is arithmetic and just a pinch algebra (though you won't really have to use it, just necessary to understand the concept of regression and stuff like that). Seriously that's all. And if you can't handle that you have no business reading primary literature in the first place.

ftp.cats.com.jo/Stat/Statistics/Introductory Statistics (7th Ed).pdf

The link above seems like a pretty good source. Ignore the formulas and figures at the very beginning; they make look complicated but they are actually describing really simple things. They only look complicated because the computations, though simple, are long and tedious, so what you are seeing is just shorthand.

that they are isomorphic

Im going to go into relativistic doppler later,
for now I'm wondering which of them actually experience time dilation, or do both of them? Or do I really have to know relativistic doppler for understanding this

Aw that makes sense. Thanks user