/sci/ - Science & Math

Computer Science is not really about computer and definitely not a science, yet they made up this name.
That's why i think it is either very open or very closed on what it really is about. Enthusiasm.
It is meaningless to compare your knowledge to a degree, not to mention the fact that people who get just about necessary knowledge for a degree doesn't understand their field and CS degree changes from time to time.

A rule of thumb maybe that how deep you want to be and how much history you know.

>using calories
>not Joules
>2012

hi /sci/ i am new here, but my firend said you can help more than yahoo answers

i am very confused about a GED question.

it says:

the average of 3 consecutive real numbers is 100, what is the value of the smallest of these three numbers?

is there enough info? i know what average is, but there is no numbers lol

thanks

Why is a full circle 360 degrees instead of a nice round number like 100 or 1000?

school is trolling you brah

Is this a Costanza thread?

>psychology
>hard science

>>>/r9k/1299491

>A scientist has not the vocabulary to describe how something can be everywhere at once and yet in only one particular spot.. spiritual folk have a better chance of explaining this with the scientists. its a funny situation really:
the science spirituality conflict. . I'm so frustrated at the unnecessary division between the two - neither 'disprove' or 'taint' the other. In fact, if someone is truly looking for truth in (spirituality/science - pick one or both), they will find many relationships and much symbiosis. It's like picking one of your feet over the other and discarding the loser. You *can*, but why *would* you? Painful, crippling, and really unnecessary. Makes me think of the silly Monopods.

/r9k/ confirmed for the dumbest board on 4chan

is it bad that one of my motivations to do science is so that i can one day post pictures on /sci/ about my cool research equipment and lab and engage in intellectual discussions with people here over scientific matters and interesting math problems?

mfw every mod on 4chan is a gigantic faggot who loves dick deep in their throats, especially moot.

>2012
>seriously hoping guys don't do things

>i seriously hope you guys won't do this

Hey /sci/,

To begin, I'd like to plead for all of you to consider this question as objectively as you can--which should be pretty easy for you all: List, out of all the humanities, social sciences, and liberal arts in general, the top three fields of study you deem the most respectable as well as a short explanation for each. To generalize, take into consideration any aspects that seem relevant: rigor, course difficulty, and even potential career opportunities.

I'm hoping I get intelligent responses that don't include "nothing that isn't science or mathematics is respectable", as I'm genuinely interested in seeing how you respond.

Thanks
(Math major, btw)

>2011
>not knowing it's prime
>not knowing it's a sexy prime
>not knowing what a sexy prime is
>not knowing it is the sum of eleven consecutive primes: 2011=157+163+167+173+179+181+191+193+197+199+211.
>ishygddt

hay kawaii/sci/

If we have a differentiable function, and it has an inverse, is the inverse differentiable?

also, if we have a continuous function but is now differentiable at a point c, will its inverse also fail differentiability at the mapping of c?

Think piecewise defined functions made up of two other functions, but if the first statement is true then it's gotta include piecewise right, i mean, that's the point of math no doubt.

I'm doing a practice exam and the inverse functions differentiability credibility is at stake. It's fine to check, but my prof permits stating theorems to skip some computation if possible.

I'm not a math major, need halp.

>>4080434
>2011
>not knowing what STR is

>>4070322

>>4057090
OP's posted grades are in calc?

you are joking me

OP confirmed for moron, the homework takes ten seconds and anything below a 100% on a babby calc test equates to full mental retardation

>>4053732

>not using polar coordinates

hey /sci/

is there a theorem for this:

If F is a function of k, and k is a function of s, and you want to find the optimal k that maximizes F, optimizing directly with respect to k is the same as putting k in terms of s and optimizing with respect to s, and then converting s back to k.

Whereas k is a complete function of s, and vice versa, no funny business.

I ask because on an exam I wrote, I did this, whereas the teacher expected us to just go with respect to k. She gave me 1/5 for that question even though I got the correct answer, and my method was actually quite a lot of work btw, definitely more difficult than doing it the way she intended.

I'm arguing with her over it, but if there is a theorem for that, then I could just punch it into her face and call her a bitch.

BTW I already went to the head of the department and he said there is no indication of the method to use in the question and I got the right answer so I should get the marks.

halp /sci/

Prove: AtA = A, then A is symmetrical and A = A^2
(where t = transpose).

<span class="math">\frac{d}{dx} x^x[/spoiler]

You have 5 seconds to answer this or you do not belong on /sci/

also explain the method you used to obtain the answer.

>>3985700

>moral calculus