/sqt/ Stupid Questions Thread

I'm writing a research project on quantum vs classical computers. I know almost nothing about theoretical cs, and absolutely nothing about quantum mechanics. I need to compare turing and quantum turing machinea in terms of what is computable by them. And i already know that their boundaries are the same. What i need are legit academic sources. Or i need to conclude that myself based on their definitions. It would be really if someone could post the link here, but i'm not hoping on that. So how can i conclude that from their definition? I can't even understand how quantum tm is defined. What parts of their design say that they can compute same things?

>Manifolds need not be embedded in anything.
Every manifold is trivially embedded in itself.

We cannot say that [math]i = \sqrt{-1}[/math] because [math]i[/math] doesn't observe the property of square roots such as [math]\sqrt{a}\cdot \sqrt{b} = \sqrt{a\cdot b}[/math]. We can say that [math]i[/math] is the number which satisfies [math]x^2 + 1 = 0[/math] but there are two such numbers.

Both of these points are usually ignored in high school. Why are high school teachers so terrible?

>Why are high school teachers so terrible?
Because you went to a high school for brainlets.

What's the point of maths? Specifically, what is the point of some proofs theorems or problems? For example, recent video, what's the point of the catalan's conjecture? Or illumination problem? They have no real life applications, other than to simply prove a point.

Never seen a teacher write [math]\mathrm i\,=\,\sqrt{-1}[/math].

>We can say that i is the number which satisfies x^2+1=0
We can't. This is unrigorous garbage.

>This is unrigorous garbage.
don't hurt yourself kid

Excuse me?

>We can't.
Speak for yourself.

You're excused kiddo

Post your face when you realize that "real life applications" are also just proving a point.

Complex numbers are literally just fiction. They don't exist.

so are integers

so is zero

>Complex numbers are literally just fiction. They don't exist.
All mathematical objects exist.

Yes, and no. At least real life applications are actually useful, I see no use in knowing catalan's conjecture. It's fun to know, sure, but other than that...

You can prove the existence of integers, not so with the complex "numbers".
They exist in the same sense fiction exists, as in they exist on some physical medium used to record them.

>You can prove the existence of integers
No you cannot.

>At least real life applications are actually useful, I see no use in knowing catalan's conjecture.
The transition from mathematics to applications can take centuries, just look at how long prime numbers took to be used for cryptography.

You can, since free groups can easily be shown to exist.

>free groups can easily be shown to exist.
No they can not.

Yes they can.

>actually useful
This is a meaningless thing to say without further elaboration.

>You can prove the existence of integers
yeah, nah

God gave us 1. That's it. Everything else is made up bullshit.

Okay, explain to me the use of the catalan conjecture, how would you apply it to real life problems?

I see your point.

>God gave us 1.
Which is all you need to show the existence of integers since they are finitely generated by 1.

>explain to me the use of the catalan conjecture
I couldn't care less about it, I'm not a n*mber theorist.
>how would you apply it to real life problems?
Why should I be applying it to "real life problems"? And what do you mean by "real life problems"?

>finitely generated
This is a meaningless notion.

>This is a meaningless notion.
This is a meaningless notion.

Real life problems as in, does it serve to further any current mathematical problem or does it help solve, for example, how tall a building should be? From my point of view, seems like some of these are just proof for the sake of proof, same as if you get a fake plant for your house, it serves no purpose.
If you don't even care about it, why reply in the first place?

what does this question actually want?

>does it serve to further any current mathematical problem
That kind of n*mber theory isn't really mathematics, so no. It might have mathematical value if the proof involves developing new mathematics or using known techniques in innovative ways, which is usually the case with longstanding conjectures.
>does it help solve, for example, how tall a building should be?
This is as retarded as asking if some new research in biology helps calculate how long a certain bridge should be. That's simply not something biologists have as a goal.
>seems like some of these are just proof for the sake of proof
Some people seem to be interested in showing it to be true and a proof is the only way of doing so.

It wants you to calculate the angle KJL to one decimal place.

I dont understand what that means
I got angle X to be 48.2 deg

So then you calculated angle KJL to one decimal place. What is there to understand?

I just dont understand the question

Which vitamins against dry skin?

strawpoll.me/15106676

So you just accidentally did it correctly, is that it?/

I dont get what "angle KJL" means. I worked out angle X.

Perhaps you can deduce what it means from the conversation we're having.

I get it but it is terrible wording.

the wording is fine, you've just never seen an angle written like that before, it's pretty common way though

What if the label "x" wasn't there?

Oh yeah that makes sense
So basically work out all angles?

My professor wants this information for a lab. It says in one box, I need: "Hydrogeologic Unit, Lithology, characteristics, depth and thickness." What the hell is a Hydrogeologic Unit? What am I suppose to be writing in? Under the information it describes the 4 aquifers and what they're made of. I don't know what to put there. My professor never answers emails.

FOUR SCOOPS

sexeh~

Can someone explain where the differential come in? I have no idea how hey just sort of happen like bam they are there and all.

It seems they are "considering the interval" and "considering the change in momentum." This is the likely source.

No, really, I have no idea what my professor wants.

Do I go to a brainlet university?

Does DNA Polymerase only work with DNA or can it work with RNA too?

They asked me that in an interview, and I said just DNA.

Am I wrong?

>Do I go to a brainlet university?
If you have to ask, yes.

>prove prove prove prove prove
depends on your major

proofs are important to some endeavors

I know RNA polymerase works with DNA and RNA, but DNA Polymerase only works with DNA right?

RIGHT?

my getting the job depends on this guys

>considering modules over fields for no good reason
Absolutely. Losing this much generality is only something true brainlets would do.

>>considering modules over fields for no good reason
Who are you quoting?

[math]/iff{a}{b}
Breast

This is a meaningless notion.

[math]/iff{a}{b}[/math]

[Math] a {/iff} b [/math]

use the previewer you fucking retard

[math] a {/iff} b [/math]

>So basically work out all angles?
[math] \angle KJL [/math] is only one angle, specifically it is the clockwise angle from the ray JK to the ray JL where J is the vertex.

It's incredibly useful notation when dealing with lots of angles that share a vertex as well as it allows you to write a question without the need for a picture

I need to do finite element analysis of a furnace, i want to see how hot the inside and outside will get. I have the model and materials, but i cant figure out the boundary conditions.
I know the amount of power put in the furnace, but i cant find any boundary condition for power.
For the wall i cant set a constant temperature since thats what i want to get, do i create a small portion of air surrounding the outside and set the air to constant temperature?

Whats the general solution to this differential equations? I got Ce^t/1+Ce^t . However all online calculators are giving different answers

Do quantum fields like the weak force field pervade the whole Universe all the time, or are they created serperate from each other like electromagnetic fields?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function

Is the brainlet meme meant to be ironically stupid? I would think factors such as neuron density, neuron connections, brain structure, and brain to body mass ratio have much more to do with intelligence than brain size.

Life is only 'organized' through our own limited human perception. It's just a coincidence, just one possibility out of infinitely many of them.

You're the one deciding to make it frustrating.

The unary operation "square root" is defined to be IR x IR -> IR. Extending it for complex numbers makes most of the properties unusable (as the one you pointed out), as an operation or a function. It's silly to extend it. Just as the logarithm.

It doesn't. Nothing 'has' a point, really. Anything in math could be useful in any or other way, it's just a matter of perspective

That pic always reminds me of these.

If I learn calculus from Spivak, can I do computations like the shit from stewart as well?

>3rd world shithole uni
>fluid mechanics in this semester
>not even finished statics, dynamics, strength and thermo
>not even finished calc 3

How fucked I am and what can I do?

Should linearizing data in different ways produce different lines of best fit? On variable is the square root of the other, and the slope for the line of best fit differs from the other by about 20% depending on whether I square one variable or take the square root of the other.

How are you in fluid mechanics? You seem to lack prerequisite knowledge.

Is everyone a fucking retard except me? I spent months terrified of taking the GRE because all the resources online seem to be measured towards room-temp IQ Indian kids, then I take the damn thing, and I scored near perfect. Anyone else have similar experiences?

I’ve had a similar experience on every standardized test I’ve ever taken.

>Is everyone a fucking retard except me?
Do you need to swear?

Seriously I got a perfect SAT and didn't prep at all.

>tfw don't know what I want to do with my life so I'm sending my near perfect GRE to dozens of schools and programs hoping one of them is neat, but i know I'll end up just picking one at random like I did for undergrad

No, sorry.

Could someone help me with 4.10.12?

I've been trying to figure it out first a couple of hours. The book doesn't really have a good example to follow and I'm too brainlet to figure it out. I think you're supposed to represent the integrand in terms of u ,w , and v, but I can't get them to work back out to the original. Could someone point me in the right direction?

No. This board is not a homework help board.

why not

but that solution is wrong

It's a fucking quarter sphere of radius 2 dumbass, are you blind?

1/4 ∭r^3 r^2 sin(θ)dϕdθdr = π ∫r^5 dr =π/6 2^6 = 2^5 π/3

I understand that it's a sphere of radius 2 and I know how to use the spherical coordinates, but I'm not sure how to do the intermediate step, I tried to convert directly to spherical coordinates but I couldn't get it to work and I can't figure out the part about the slice of melon, I think I need some algebra trick but I'm not sure what it is.

What book is that?

Hubbard and Hubbard: Vector Calculus, Linear Algebra, and Differential Forms

It's a lemon slice since z>=0 and y>=0 (think northern hemisphere cut in half). But it's the integral of |r|^3 is so you can double both ranges and add a factor of 1/4.

Or you can just do 0

I see now, my professor told us to "Read the note in the margin!" and I thought it was implying that we had to parameterize it. That's what messed me up

If space is expanding does it mean that everything (and everyone) is in theory bigger each second? Is there any way to relate the expansion to meters (or rather current meters if space is expanding)?
Is time expanding too?