/sqt/ Stupid Questions Thread

Did you copy that correctly?
I think you must mean for the right side of the equation for things to have any chance of handling scalar multiples of t.

yeah sorry, that's

Then it's pretty straightforward if you use matrix-vector notation and expand things using linearity of expectation..

The critical point is that
^2 is t'(X - EX)'(X-EX)t
where t' is transpose(t).
Then use the fact that, for a random matrix A, and constant vector b, E(b'Ab) = b'(EA)b.

>living in a shithole country

Well, it's not like I got to choose.

If you just care about money it's going to be painful and embarrassing for you and you're never going to do well at it.

Your best prospect is finding a sinecure and hoping that no one really cares about how much you fuck up or how little you actually do.

Just bought Swakowski's Calculus with Analytic Geometry, 2nd revised ed. from Goodwill, how good of a text is it?

Usually I buy other mathematics books that I come across so I have larger problem sets to choose from whenever I need to go back over a topic and not forget it, just in case the answers for problems I already went over are still stuck in my head.

>Just bought Swakowski's Calculus with Analytic Geometry, 2nd revised ed. from Goodwill, how good of a text is it?
Why don't you read it and find out?

I'm about to. I was mainly looking for an overview of quality compared to some more modern texts or maybe a range from Stewarts to Spivaks perhaps.

I'll let you all know how it goes, though and what I think compared to the dozen or so other books I've gone through.

can anyone help me prove this? its a big-Omega question, I know it can be more CS but Im having trouble with the math parts.

I know that big-omega states that
f(n) >= C * g(n) for all n >= k
such that C and k are constants >= 1

for any two random values of k or C I choose the equation does not work, like if I chose
C = 1
and k = 5

log5(n) >= ( C ) * ( log2(n) ) for all n >= 5
and lets say n = 5:
log5(5) >= ( C ) * ( log2(5) ) for all n >= 5
1 >= 2.321 which is false

and for any values it comes out as false, is there a more formal way to derive C or K for this? thanks