Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Astronomy is the definitely the best, in my opinion. There's just something about it that's so storming interesting.

Posted

Biochemistry, huh? 

 

Yep, I'm majoring in Biochemistry. I've got a Metabolism assignment and midterm that I need to know this for.

Posted

I never learned how tp use Laplace Transforms.. hated them with my guts...

 

I do like some stats and calc though :)

My bane was the last third of Calculus 2 where you had to do series. I just didn't see the patterns the way some others seemed to have the ability to see. I maintain that the capability to express patterns as equations requires a level of abstract thought that should be regarded as a talent; I'm honestly not sure if mastery of that skill can be taught. I mean sure, if you made me do hours of these kinds of problems for several weeks, I could probably develop a basic competency; however, like musical talent, I don't think practice session grinding will ever produce a more-than-mediocre equation writer or musician.

Also arcs drove me nuts. I could NOT grasp (still can't really) how an arc can be the same length as a line connecting two points. I remember getting so stuck on this that couldn't pay attention past that point to hear the rest of the lecture. It just contradicted the maxim of "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line."

Any of you math geniuses able to offer a better explanation (of how an arc connecting two points can be the same length as a straight line connecting those same points) than, "Well, arcs can be the same length. That's just the way it is."?

Posted

If I never have to see the word 'Hamiltonian' again for the next month or so...
 
I told my prof flatly, as I was going through the manuscript, "Look, I've checked everything except your Hamiltonians, okay? I can check your basic DEs, I can spend two hours going through German articles to see who on earth Claisen's co-discoverer of the Claisen rearrangement was, I can check everything else, but please don't ask me to check your Hamiltonians because I'm not trained and I have no idea even if there's a misprint."
 
My prof said, very calmly, at the end of all that: "I never even expected you to check the mathematics. I know that's not your job."
 
...Sigh.

Posted

Cool!

Is there a reason biology is not one of the tags? Are you one of the people that doesn't consider it a "real" science? :huh:

All science is applied math or stamp collecting...

It's awesome that everyone here seems to know a lot more calc than I do! Maybe there's a few tutors should I need one. I'm taking "Calculus w/Analytic Trigonometry and Geometry," which most of you would consider to be quite basic, from what I'm reading. Formal definition of limits, differentiation, curve sketching, optimization, related rates, etc. I just started learning integration in class today.

So far it really hasn't been that hard, just time-consuming.

Posted

All science is applied math or stamp collecting...

It's awesome that everyone here seems to know a lot more calc than I do! Maybe there's a few tutors should I need one. I'm taking "Calculus w/Analytic Trigonometry and Geometry," which most of you would consider to be quite basic, from what I'm reading. Formal definition of limits, differentiation, curve sketching, optimization, related rates, etc. I just started learning integration in class today.

So far it really hasn't been that hard, just time-consuming.

 

If you need help shoot me a PM

Posted

I was bored in class so I decided to try to derive the cubic formula :rolleyes:

I worked out the general/algebraic form for the solution of the determinant of a 3x3 matrix once.:ph34r:
Posted

I worked out the general/algebraic form for the solution of the determinant of a 3x3 matrix once. :ph34r:

 

Just once... right?

Posted

Well sure. I wasn't going to rewrite out all the algebra to demonstrate it again (It's not quite as simple as the ad-bc form of a 2x2 determinant). And the thing itself was a bit big. So pro-tip: Just memorize the process of solving determinants of 3x3's. It's quicker, and then works for larger determinants.

Posted

Just about finished level 2 physics at university (I did '2nd year' over 2 years). So the maths that I've done has been the pre/co-requisites for the physics, primarily. Though my minor will be mathematics. 

Posted

For those who care, tell me if this looks right for the cubic formula:

 

ax^3+bx^2+cx+d=0

x=y-b/3a

y^3+(c/a-b^2/3a^3)y+(2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a)=0

c/a-b^2/3a^2=p

2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a=q

y^3+py+q=0

y=z-p/3z

z^3-p^3/27z^3+q=0

(z^3)^2+qz^3-p^3/27

z=(-q/2+-(q^2/4+p^3/27)^1/2)^1/3

z simplified=((-108q+-12(12p^3+27q^2)^1/2)^1/3)/6

y=((2p^2(-108q+-12(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)^1/3)+((4(2p^3+27q^2+-3q(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2))^1/3(9q+-(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)))/12p^2

 

Still haven't managed to simplify when replacing p and q with a b c and d :P

Posted

All science is applied math or stamp collecting...

 

 

I used to be one of the people who considered Bio to not really be a science. But once I started doing my more advanced bio courses such as biotechnology and toxicology I have changed my opinion. 

Posted

For those who care, tell me if this looks right for the cubic formula:

 

ax^3+bx^2+cx+d=0

x=y-b/3a

y^3+(c/a-b^2/3a^3)y+(2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a)=0

c/a-b^2/3a^2=p

2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a=q

y^3+py+q=0

y=z-p/3z

z^3-p^3/27z^3+q=0

(z^3)^2+qz^3-p^3/27

z=(-q/2+-(q^2/4+p^3/27)^1/2)^1/3

z simplified=((-108q+-12(12p^3+27q^2)^1/2)^1/3)/6

y=((2p^2(-108q+-12(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)^1/3)+((4(2p^3+27q^2+-3q(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2))^1/3(9q+-(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)))/12p^2

 

Still haven't managed to simplify when replacing p and q with a b c and d :P

 

That looks nasty, it must be true.

Posted

I used to be one of the people who considered Bio to not really be a science. But once I started doing my more advanced bio courses such as biotechnology and toxicology I have changed my opinion.

Oh, bio is definitely science. Don't disagree with you.
Posted

Sometimes I wish the Shard supported LaTeX or Mathprint, or some such thing that rendered maths stuff nicely...

Posted

For those who care, tell me if this looks right for the cubic formula:

 

ax^3+bx^2+cx+d=0

x=y-b/3a

y^3+(c/a-b^2/3a^3)y+(2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a)=0

c/a-b^2/3a^2=p

2b^3/27a^3-bc/3a^3+d/a=q

y^3+py+q=0

y=z-p/3z

z^3-p^3/27z^3+q=0

(z^3)^2+qz^3-p^3/27

z=(-q/2+-(q^2/4+p^3/27)^1/2)^1/3

z simplified=((-108q+-12(12p^3+27q^2)^1/2)^1/3)/6

y=((2p^2(-108q+-12(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)^1/3)+((4(2p^3+27q^2+-3q(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2))^1/3(9q+-(12p^3+81q^2)^1/2)))/12p^2

 

Still haven't managed to simplify when replacing p and q with a b c and d :P

 

There was a methodology for this kind of stuff, but I kinda forgot about it  :ph34r:

Posted

Oh, bio is definitely science. Don't disagree with you.

I was more worried that you seemed to have something against stamp collecting.

Posted

I figured I'd elaborate on my earlier post. I love science. Astronomy is my favorite, psychology is really interesting, and I'd probably take physics if there wasn't so much darn math. You see, math isn't exactly my forte, which could cause... problems were I to ever seriously consider a scientific career. Probably why it's just a hobby. :P

Also, mechanical engineering and architecture. Also involve math and science. Also awesome.

Posted

My bane was the last third of Calculus 2 where you had to do series. I just didn't see the patterns the way some others seemed to have the ability to see. I maintain that the capability to express patterns as equations requires a level of abstract thought that should be regarded as a talent; I'm honestly not sure if mastery of that skill can be taught. I mean sure, if you made me do hours of these kinds of problems for several weeks, I could probably develop a basic competency; however, like musical talent, I don't think practice session grinding will ever produce a more-than-mediocre equation writer or musician.

Also arcs drove me nuts. I could NOT grasp (still can't really) how an arc can be the same length as a line connecting two points. I remember getting so stuck on this that couldn't pay attention past that point to hear the rest of the lecture. It just contradicted the maxim of "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line."

Any of you math geniuses able to offer a better explanation (of how an arc connecting two points can be the same length as a straight line connecting those same points) than, "Well, arcs can be the same length. That's just the way it is."?

Calculus 2 is the hardest math - especially with the stuff about Series thrown in there. It's like they couldn't find a good spot for it and there's not enough for a whole class on just Series, so they threw it in with Calculus 2. Once you get past that though, math gets much easier (granted, I haven't gone past differential equations).

Posted (edited)

So we just did the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus today, which was cool. Also, for clarification, because my teacher isn't particularly good at explaining things: An antiderivative is the same thing as an indefinite integral, right? Why?

Edited by Elbereth
Posted

So we just did the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus today, which was cool. Also, for clarification, because my teacher isn't particularly good at explaining things: An antiderivative is the same thing as an indefinite integral, right? Why?

Why not?  :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...