/sqt/ Stupid Questions Thread

prepare myself to finish with a C in the lab component of the course.

Who the fuck is such a numale faggot that cries shit in sex other than some grunt lmao.

it's clear you have never watched hentai. Leave this board, and never come back.

What should I start doing as an undergrad if I eventually want to do a PhD?

>if I eventually want to do a PhD?
Since I don't know your major some general advice:
1) Get good grades and try to learn beyond your course material with self study. Remember that "good grades" means 3.5-7 in major, >3.0 cumulative, you don't need a 4.0 to get into a good program, but it helps.
2) Form relationships (positive) with your professors.
3) Do some kind of internship or research experience every summer. If you don't do this, you need a 4.0 GPA.
4) Figure out what getting a PhD entails. Figure out what PhDs in your field actually do. Figure out what you want in life (in terms of life style and quality, not whether or not you want to "be a professor" or "be a scientist" or "be the next [your sciencefu]"). Make sure that getting a PhD is how you want to go about attaining that life you want. Be aware that there are other options, but that you're choosing to do a PhD because it's what you want.

(btw, there's a name for people who don't do (4). It's "master of science.")

Do people always share more of an expressed phenotype with their siblings than they do anyone else on earth?

That's pretty subjective

My brother started reading this lately and keeps talking to me about it. What can I tell or link him to refute what the book says, assuming he will even read it?

Why? Don't I share more non-dormant genes with my brother and sister than with anyone else? And If geneotype determines phenotype, then it should stand to reason that ours is also most similar? Sorry if I sound retarded

If the multiverse theory is correct, then is there a universe where no one has ever flipped a quarter that's landed on tails?

It's called the kinoverse.

youtube.com/watch?v=NbInZ5oJ0bc

>pic

So do Christcucks shout of "baby Jesus", or "Virgin Mary", or "Yahweh" when they cum?

watching Gary Oldman say heads over and over is a tough thing to do

Wow, you have issues dude.

I'm trying to extend the euclidean algorithm to find

d = as + bt where d = gcd(a,b)

I've applied the Euclidean Algorithm:

a = 270, b= 192

270 = 192 * 1 + 78
192 = 78 * 2 + 36
78 = 36 * 2 + 6
36 = 6 * 6 + 0

r = 0 so we terminate and the gcd = 6.

Extending the Euclidean Algorithm

6 = 78 - 36 * 2
= 78 -(192 - 78 * 2) * 2 //Expressing 36 from step 2 above.

I have to simplify and then express 78 from step 1 but everytime I do it, my final answer does not equate to 6.

Can anybody help me here?

multiverse =/= many-worlds

>Can anybody help me here?
we can't point out what you did wrong if you don't show your work

Apologies.

This is where I go from there:

= 3 * 78 + (-2) * 192 //the step I fuck up in, when trying to simplify
= 3(270 - 192 * 1) + (-2)192
= 3 * 270 + (-3)192

= 78 -(192 - 78 * 2) * 2
= 78 + (78 * 2 - 192) * 2

I must have a fundamental gap in my algebraic knowledge. I just don't make those natural jumps.

I can rewrite what you gave me as

= 78 + 2(78 * 2 - 192)
= 5(78) - 2(192)

Does that mean s = 5 and t = -2

This doesn't satisfy d = as + bt
As a and b are 270 and 192

So I would try and express 5(78) in terms of 270.

= 5(270 - 192 * 1) - 2(192)
And I'm lost from here.

>= 5(270 - 192 * 1) - 2(192)
>And I'm lost from here.
a(b-c)=ab-ac

[math]\sqrt x ^ \sqrt x=x^{x^{1 \over 2} \over 2}[/math]
Take a look into tetration

5(270) - 5(-192) - 2(192)
5(270) - 7(192)

Thank you so much. I'm definitely feeling like a moron at the moment.

Online calculator now tells me I've got the right co-efficients. To make sure I can do this in the future without just falling apart is it just practice and not overthinking it. Those basic arithmetic facts you applied I know of, they just don't jump off the page to me and I end up looking for other ways to do it and just ruining my process.

Thanks!

i'm not a chemist sorry

is cuckoldry really the intellectual's fetish?

brainlet here

There is a major such that there is a student in the class in every year of study with that major.

Let M(x, y) represent a major x that has students in all y class standings. The domain of x majors includes computer science and mathematics. The domain y includes all class standings freshman to senior.

∃x∀y M((x, y))

is this an acceptable expression

it has little to nothing to do with chemistry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetration

>little
i'm not a chemist sorry

He's trolling you. I bet it's the same dude that says "No such thing" when someone mentions anything involving infinity.
Just ignore this kid until it's 9 PM and he has to go to bed.

But [math]\infty \notin \mathbb{R}[/math] so how can it exist

>∃x∀y M((x, y))
I think it's supposed to be ∃x(∀y(M(x,y))) but only if the graders is pedantic. Looks good otherwise.

I was curious about social structures, specifically familial ones but don't know what to read without getting things that are critical of social norms or that describe gender theory. I just want to know what exists, without a judgement of whether it's a good thing or something that needs to be changed. I don't know if this is psychology or sociology.
Also with a death in my family we were handed a pamphlet that pretty precisely described a timeline of decisions made by the person who was dying, and I don't know how to search for the psychology of death.

thank-you

How do I fucking concentrate to study when my mind is too busy having obsessive/intrussive thoughts?

For my QM class, the teacher gave us as reference books Quantum Mechanics and Advanced Quantum Mechanics, both writen by Schwabl. Does someone who did used them can give my his opinion on these two ?

Please explain, I just did a problem similar to this except it asked for the transform of sint * u(t-pi/2), where u(t-pi/2) is the unit step function. I ended up with se^(-pi/2)/(s^2 +1)

I'm retarded, here's the image.

Anyone ITT who is experienced with GNU/Linux and compiling source-code written in two different languages (C and C++ in this case)?

I need an answer relatively soon and don't want to take the time explaining it if no one can help lmao.

please respond

I recently read a short story that explained the acceleration of the expansion of the universe as the physical symptom of the timespace manifold being drawn into the event horizon of a temporal black hole. The writer argues that since time dilates as one approaches the event horizon of a physical black hole, physics must dilate as an object approaches the event horizon of a temporal black hole.

I know very little about time and astronomy, what are the problems with this theory?

What's a Perfectoid Space?

shape of your anus post-prolapse

>What's a Perfectoid Space?
mathoverflow.net/questions/65729/what-are-perfectoid-spaces
ams.org/notices/201409/rnoti-p1082.pdf

No. A coin toss is defined by many many things. Gravity, force, weather etc. And the many-worlds theory is a misnomer. What it should say is one-worlds. I don't doubt the existence of parallel worlds but given what we know of behavior and how things work, it's impossible for them to be any different from our own.

I recently read Scott Robertson's "How to Draw," and something threw me off.
Most of his drawings were in two point perspective.
I've been working at this for a few days, and I don't really see how to draft in true three point perspective.
I'd like to point out that three point perspective as it's presented now has the problem of being either angled up or down, and because of this it causes the picture plane to be distorted.
I've understood Robertson's perspective grid well enough to find the vanishing point for a line at any angle, but I have yet to find a way to simplify finding the vanishing points for a rotated cube.
Picture related.

Please respond.

just add another point of reference you brainlet

I'm not sure you understand the problem.

requesting the comparison of esteemed scientists (schrödinger etc) to "modern" scientists like bill nye and black sceince guy regarding philosophy

The purpose of this was to make a method artists could use.
If I start adding a coordinate system that means the person drafting has to calculate using numbers.
I'm looking for something that I can do using just a compass and a straightedge.
It is also useful to point out that there is already another point of reference, one is the camera, one is the line in question.
I was wondering how you can rotate said line to be perpendicular to the previous one.
Which would consist of several points of reference.
Unfortunately this does not help me solve my problem.
Please elaborate.

youtube.com/watch?v=EPBaHkj753I
shit face, literarlly 3 seconds of googling gets an answer

You have confirmed my suspicion that you do not understand what I am asking.
Most artists feel out vanishing points.
I'm trying to find an objective way to doing this WITHOUT feeling them out.
In the video the camera is pointed upwards, while the picture plane is still perpendicular to the ground.
What I am trying to do is to find the projection using a compass and a straightedge without a question of it's accuracy.
This requires the cube's view to not be relative to the camera, but to be rotated dependent on their own three lines.
The attached picture illustrates my point.
I want a view similar to something a 3d program would provide.
However, I would like to be able to do this by hand.

...

Simple problems such as looking up or down become increasingly difficult once the picture plane is horizontal, as the further you stray from the edges of your field of view, the more distorted the image becomes.
I would like control over this distortion, by having my center of vision be directly in the center of the diagram.

>study actuarial science in college, pass a few actuarial exams
>didn't do an internship while undergrad
How badly did I fuck myself? Does there exist a job anywhere in this field which will take a college graduate with no actuarial experience?

If sqrt(x) = x^(1/2) then it can be concluded
sqrt(x)^sqrt(x) = sqrt(x)^(x^(1/2)) thus
sqrt(x)^(x^(1/2)) = (x^(1/2))^(x^(1/2))

The wikipedia page for the book alone has like over a page of text concerning criticism of the book.

What are some resources to learn mental arithmetic? I never really studied it as a child and I'm slow/inaccurate as fuck. This is beginning to give me trouble, and I have a standardized test coming up requiring me to add three-digit numbers rapidly and accurately.

Are there any resources to hone your mental math skills?

9+17
26+37
114+230
you've got 20 seconds, no calculator, no writing of any kind.

I'm sorry if this has been confusing, were talking about something visual.
This is the distortion that I'm talking about.
If you can rotate objects by calculating the vanishing points.
You can then angle the camera.

...

26
63
344
wow im a math genius now thanks

...

the point is you literally just need practice the mental methods. speed comes in time.

oh and once you got the addition mastered try going
9*17
26*37
114*230
etc

There are asian kids that are so good at using an abacus that they can do complex math problems in milliseconds try that.

youtube.com/watch?v=3g63WR_PelY

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How does science rectify the ideas that time is not constant across the universe or that it might not exist but also that eventually the universe will experience a heat death?

It's inefficient to use your phonological loop to do math, so just learn the soroban, then practice for a few years until you can do problems without one.
Visually people can do this stuff in seconds.

remember, speed comes in time. if it takes your 10 minutes, then let that be a time with which you seek to improve on.

I get it algebraically, but is there a geometric or intuitive explanation for why n, (1/2)(n^2-1), and (1/2)(n^2+1) is a pythagorean triple? (n is odd)

proof: think

FUCK YOU

I get it algebraically, but is there a geometric or intuitive explanation for why 1+1=2?

cant get more intuitive and/or geometric than pic related

you can use to show that there are many points in the unit circle in Q^2

but thats just what other people tell me "2" is
not very intuitive at all
what if the all of the "1 thing"s are the same thing?

This is from the stable marriage problem.

A relationship is considered unstable if there is a roommate in each room who prefers eachother over their current roommates.

I know when ranking their preferences, every top preference must be different or there would be an arrangement that would be stable.

A B. C D
__________________________
1. B 1. C 1. D 1. D
2. 2. 2. 2.
3. 3. 3. 3.

I think this is the closest you're ever going to get to an answer to that question
youtube.com/watch?v=QJYmyhnaaek

I'm 26, have only a high school diploma and a desire to go to college to my name. I've been tested at a 125 IQ.

Realistically, what are my career prospects looking like? What's my professional ceiling?

What is the evolutionary practicality of idolism

>trolling
is this the new word for making a joke?

tetration sounds like titration

Struggling a bit with this coding theory problem.
For (a), I know that the answer is |Cn|=2^(n-1), but I'm not sure how to show it inductively.
For (b), I'm guessing the code is not MDS since for n=2, d=/=0 but again, not sure how to show this rigorously.
Not entirely sure how to approach (c).

for a)
|(Z_2)^n|=2^n
if u1...u_{n-1} is in C_{n-1} (inductively |C_{n-1}|=2^(n-2)) then u1...u_{n-1}0 is in C_n
if u1...u_{n-1} isnt in C_{n-1} (inductively 2^(n-1)-|C_n|=2^(n-2) such strings) then u_1...u_{n-1}1 is in C_n
so |C_n|=2^(n-2)+2^(n-2)=2^(n-1)

>(inductively 2^(n-1)-|C_n|=2^(n-2) such strings)
(inductively 2^(n-1)-|C_{n-1}|=2^(n-2) such strings)*

Is it that fucking hard to use tex?

>Is it that fucking hard to use tex?
hard no, unnecessary yes

>unnecessary
It's not though. Your garbage is unreadable.

>It's not though. Your garbage is unreadable.
if you have even a beginner's level of familiarity with latex it should be perfectly readable, you'll probably get more used to it within a few years