420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Top 10 favourite Integers by Colonel Badtouch - Fri, 04 Nov 2016 15:38:05 EST ID:9bYxsT36 No.15261 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1478288285194.jpg -(104652B / 102.20KB, 640x427) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 104652
Hey guys what are some of your favourite integers? Here's my top 10:
10. 34,236
9. 8
8. 457,893 ( I bet some of you thought this would be higher!)
7. 43.
6. 6 (Imagine that!)
5. 240
4. 9000
3. 7,777,777
2. 7, 777,771
  1. 108
12 posts and 5 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Nigel Cronningfudge - Mon, 01 May 2017 13:44:06 EST ID:QC/JAkzH No.15492 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I like 1, 3, 7 & 12. And 24. And 144,000
Martha Deddlestat - Wed, 03 May 2017 12:52:44 EST ID:lYjTKStM No.15493 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The Fermat Primes https://oeis.org/A019434
3, 5, 17, 257, 65537

the form of 2^(2^m)+1 makes them just one too large to use 8 bit or 16 bit binary calculations (which might be alleviated and as such is part of the interest)
And they represent the number of sides of construable regular polygons which are as perfect as you can approximate a circle in their own right, in terms of relative the quality of approximation vs number of digits needed to do the calculation.
Fanny Mippermid - Fri, 01 Dec 2017 14:38:59 EST ID:xLSFv1HV No.15590 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1512157139070.jpg -(16116B / 15.74KB, 225x225) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
  1. 420
4.80 (quatre-vingt means blaze it in french)
Cedric Hogglechurk - Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:20:11 EST ID:BLVxKgwM No.15600 Ignore Report Quick Reply
500, suckers. Fucking solid as hell.

147, what the fuck even is that?

33554432, just Fucking dancing on the edge of projected sanity and insanity
Phineas Porryspear - Sun, 21 Jan 2018 02:43:57 EST ID:smYtBOal No.15601 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Calc by Fry & Leela - Sun, 16 Jul 2017 12:43:38 EST ID:Rhgh4/nK No.15536 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1500223418101.jpg -(12838B / 12.54KB, 398x66) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 12838
Can anyone tell me where to begin with this problem? I'm clueless. Our professor didn't cover it. I imagine start by taking d/dx and plugging the values in at some point?
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Fuck Murdridge - Tue, 18 Jul 2017 16:12:50 EST ID:XBxBdy5C No.15538 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Pretty much this, but check the values at the endpoints of the interval too not just at local Mac/mins.
Martha Hellyford - Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:10:34 EST ID:cezjQDuj No.15540 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>So that means that ANY time your d/dx crosses the y-axis, it creates a "local" maximum value
Oops, I meant
>creates a "local" max OR min value, i.e. just a peak/trough somewhere
It's only a max if the derivative's slope is negative around that zero
Jack Bimmleshit - Sat, 11 Nov 2017 17:51:42 EST ID:y7H0hQp+ No.15583 Ignore Report Quick Reply
or, an inflection point if f''(x) = 0
Jack Ciblinghood - Sat, 18 Nov 2017 17:25:36 EST ID:BDm+BNlx No.15586 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The concavity has to change for it to be an inflection point. If it's concave up, then a place where f''(x)=0, then goes back to being concave up, it's not an inflection point.
Ian Chollystock - Thu, 28 Dec 2017 23:16:23 EST ID:QQuXTugO No.15599 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1514520983608.png -(15127B / 14.77KB, 615x345) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
What I would do first OP is I would graph the function and look at the range between 0 and 4 on the X axis and see if there's an obvious maximum. In this case, it looks like there is one.

Math help by Hugh Ponnerstork - Sun, 03 Dec 2017 12:53:39 EST ID:iVRKbSmx No.15591 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1512323619034.jpg -(707975B / 691.38KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 707975
Help me solve this equation for a,b,c, & d ...

3a - 4b + c - d = 0
Emma Fiddlespear - Sun, 03 Dec 2017 15:14:24 EST ID:d8q0ZW2Y No.15592 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Insufficient data for meaningful response.
Cyril Honeyshit - Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:51:49 EST ID:9aoCBI3Y No.15595 Ignore Report Quick Reply
a= 0, b= 0, c= 0, d= 0 is a solution
Lillian Pogglegold - Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:33:18 EST ID:BDm+BNlx No.15596 Ignore Report Quick Reply

There are infinitely many solutions
Ian Chollystock - Thu, 28 Dec 2017 23:12:11 EST ID:QQuXTugO No.15598 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The fact that the equation is using the variables "a, b, c, and d" and it that they are equal to zero implies that this is a 3D plane equation. Like other people have pointed out, there are infinitely many points that would satisfy this equation in Euclidean space because geometrically speaking you can place an infinite number of points on any given plane.

Complex Analysis by Hamilton Dosslemene - Tue, 08 Aug 2017 21:15:47 EST ID:2Nfpe0g9 No.15547 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1502241347722.jpg -(39592B / 38.66KB, 331x499) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 39592
Can somebody explain to me why I need to take a Complex Analysis class?

I'm doing a MS Mathematics and going on to a PhD in Statistics/Probability

I don't see any fucking point in studying Complex Anal.
Ebenezer Demblekere - Thu, 10 Aug 2017 15:15:33 EST ID:gFrVWF8h No.15548 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Are you sure you have to take that specific class? At my university there are distribution requirements, where you might have to take a year of some type of analysis class. Maybe you can change the MS program you are enrolled in to an applied math MS where the requirements are different. Even then, complex analysis is a branch of math that has a lot of real world uses, it's not like this is a class on Galois theory.

Here you are required to take 2 semesters of regular analysis, but not the complex.
Walter Davinglock - Mon, 11 Sep 2017 09:56:07 EST ID:wdbZy6Bd No.15560 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah...actually I tried not taking it and my advisor said I have to.

Tbh now that I'm in the class it ain't bad. But I wanted to take a statistical theory course and own i cant.
John Gemmertut - Sat, 23 Dec 2017 07:59:50 EST ID:18TzhZsM No.15597 Ignore Report Quick Reply
complex analysis is useful for a lot of things in math. Since your ms is in math and not statistics, complex analysis is considered an essential core course, like abstract algebra or real analysis. With your PhD studies in mind, complex analysis can be useful because it gives a way to evaluate a lot of different definite integrals over the entire real line. Even for real-valued functions, we can sometimes solve otherwise impossible integrals by passing to the complex plane, taking a clever contour, and then taking the limit as the contour expands. This comes up when you are trying to find the fourier transform of certain functions, for example, or when you want to integrate certain PDFs over the entire real line. It's a useful class anon. Even if it doesn't seem like it. Lots of great statisticians were at least proficient in complex analysis.

What's the biggest number? by Nathaniel Sacklespear - Fri, 23 Sep 2016 09:54:08 EST ID:XssdERJk No.15209 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1474638848911.jpg -(72632B / 70.93KB, 720x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 72632
Assume we had all the possible methods of information storage in the universe and all the resources of the universe at our whimsical disposal.

What's the largest number we could put down in some kind of recording before we ran out of universe?

So I guess the core question I'm asking is what's the most compact way to write large numbers? Is there anything that beats out scientific notation? And what's the greatest extreme to which we could conceivably take this?
30 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Eliza Blackworth - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 19:44:00 EST ID:z6ik/LbC No.15555 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>It's incomprehensible.

For you maybe. Thousands of people have a solid understanding of infinity.
Matilda Clipperhood - Sat, 09 Sep 2017 10:23:22 EST ID:vnPM6s0z No.15558 Ignore Report Quick Reply
tree fiddy
Priscilla Fidgehed - Thu, 30 Nov 2017 22:42:13 EST ID:fjf6McJz No.15589 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Man, back when I was a Jehovahs Witness a kind hearted but pretty stupid priest there once said "A Googolplex is the biggest number of all." And if you tried to explain to him that it isn't he'd get mad.
Nell Bundleshaw - Wed, 06 Dec 2017 16:06:20 EST ID:F95jr/F4 No.15593 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There's no real boundary between "notation" and "formula". Arabic numbers might be conceived as a sort of formula which takes a vector of integers to a finite power series (a1, a2, a3, a4, ...) -> (...((a1 * 10 + a2)*10 + a3)*10 + ...))...). Likewise you can have formulas like Conway's chained arrows which express huge numbers, for which the chained arrows effectively take the place of notation because writing 3->3->3->3 in Arabic numerals is already far beyond impossible.
Cornelius Henningbanks - Tue, 12 Dec 2017 02:30:02 EST ID:BDm+BNlx No.15594 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I would think of it as a function rather than a formula. Interpreting the conway notation as a function, its domain is sequences of natural numbers and the codomain is natural numbers. It just happens to be a function that takes larger values, and of course there is always going to be a function that provides numbers larger than the ones you would obtain with the conway notation.

In fact, natural numbers and all other mathematical objects are functions in some sense. You could think of the number 5 as being a class function from the set theoretical universe V into 2, that takes the value 1 on 0,1,2,3,4 and is 0 everywhere else. The empty set would be the function that takes the value 0 everywhere.

This doesn't work depending on what theory you are trying to formalize math in. For instance in ZFC you can't talk about a function f from V into 2, or V at all for that matter. So, everything is a function and whenever we write something it is a description of the desired function. Even the text itself could be considered a function.

We can reason about an arbitrarily large numbers using symbols. I could say that n is the smallest number that can't be written out in arabic numerals using all of the resources of the universe, and then talk about 2^n. I couldn't do this in the theory of arithmetic, because there is no way to formalize the idea of the amount of data stored in the universe within the theory. If you moved to a more powerful theory, then another problem occurs.

We don't really know what the universe is, how big it is, or other things that we would need to know to get a real answer. So to answer OPs questions:

We don't know what the largest number we could write down is because we don't know enough about the universe, and it depends on the type of notation we use to write down the number. There is no most compact way to write large numbers. There are many ways that you can beat scientific notation. You can take it as extreme as you want.

The largest numbers we have ever talked about come about from sentences like "The smallest number than can't be expressed in 100 characters or less by a formula of set theory". Y…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

They don't wanna Talk about this very simple unsolved math: https://tinyurl.com/yd7okrue by Anonymous - Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:42:57 EST ID:9RLAtG0r No.15585 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1510850577128.png -(478143B / 466.94KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 478143
Here is the link to these secret problems: https://tinyurl.com/yd7okrue
Rebecca Gendlelock - Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:31 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15587 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm not clicking that link. What do you take me for, some sort of fool?
Isabella Sugglenetch - Sun, 26 Nov 2017 07:31:40 EST ID:d8q0ZW2Y No.15588 Ignore Report Quick Reply
i bet your so-called link doesnt even relate to mathematics, you dirty bastard

Hey Neeeeerd by Alice Bleffingford - Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:23:32 EST ID:n3nShEOS No.15542 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1500848612257.jpg -(59386B / 57.99KB, 580x407) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 59386
Why do you post here? Wouldn't it be easier to go to a forum or something that is specifically created for mathematics discussion? Why do you post here and wait like 4 weeks for a reply from some stoned hippy when you can go somewhere else for quicker and more informed input?
3 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Clara Dartman - Mon, 07 Aug 2017 05:41:18 EST ID:IYDdeQTK No.15546 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pretty sure the IRC is an acceptable workaround for the no hookups rule and if you guys wanted you could all get some messaging service that would be a lot faster and more direct to collaborate on maths.
Isabella Blatherson - Fri, 11 Aug 2017 10:36:54 EST ID:GTsdVIEf No.15549 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I reckon it didn't go back to 79 the following minute.
Phineas Turveyhood - Sat, 21 Oct 2017 02:58:05 EST ID:mDdoWUWV No.15574 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I respect hippies' input on math.
Cornelius Pullermotch - Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:27:56 EST ID:A8rh+RAv No.15575 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I post here for the same reason I do drugs with hippies and try to teach them about infinity.
Priscilla Blucklewit - Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:54:44 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15582 Ignore Report Quick Reply
the other boards actually get traffic

i thought math nerds were supposed to be smart guess not LOL

Visually Understanding Math by Shit Blangertere - Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:57:11 EST ID:RLkenDTl No.14091 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1403002631911.jpg -(499955B / 488.24KB, 1200x780) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 499955
Hi guys,

Wondering if anyone could point me to an introductory level book on Math that teaches primarily by showing how to visualise the math so that I can understand HOW it works (as opposed to just memorising the equations/procedures and accepting that they work).

I'm thinking of going Feynman's Lectures atm, but am wondering if there's something better you guys might recommend.

Again, would like it to start at the very basics if possible.

Thanks and Jesus.
3 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Sophie Blackhood - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:36:00 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15554 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Source on the pic OP?
Cyril Duvingbug - Thu, 07 Sep 2017 19:20:05 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15557 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I need a source on this fucking picture.
Polly Sungershit - Wed, 20 Sep 2017 18:08:15 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15564 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Lydia Wullyshaw - Mon, 02 Oct 2017 02:46:29 EST ID:Xel5TJuB No.15573 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The source is from Gizmodo's "sexy robot costume" contest 2010:
Priscilla Blucklewit - Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:53:11 EST ID:m52FE4m4 No.15581 Ignore Report Quick Reply
thanks bro

absolutely perfect resolution by discovery - Mon, 06 Nov 2017 21:35:10 EST ID:5rRuxZsJ No.15579 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1510022110016.png -(22781B / 22.25KB, 777x486) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 22781
golden ratio
Albert Brookwater - Tue, 07 Nov 2017 12:00:57 EST ID:BDm+BNlx No.15580 Ignore Report Quick Reply


I'm an autistic by Sophie Crovingspear - Sun, 05 Nov 2017 03:47:19 EST ID:aO21Ekyq No.15577 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1509871639668.png -(1048491B / 1023.92KB, 651x618) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1048491
I am taking a class in abstract algebra and was getting ready for a test and noticed a pattern that has popped up when shows how to represent all polynomial functions in a ring that map from Zmodn to Zmodn. What I (think) I found is pretty much why when you have some value x^n it can be replaced with x etc. Pretty much showing why there is only one way to represent all the functions withing the ring due to not being able to have any x raised to something larger than n-1
Reuben Drucklenire - Sun, 05 Nov 2017 16:13:48 EST ID:pjkjVzRP No.15578 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Also, if n=4 then 2^4=16=0 but 0 is not 2. You can only do your trick when k and phi(n) are coprime.

Oh fuck. by Poor faggot - Sun, 10 Sep 2017 05:38:52 EST ID:8UKf4f6U No.15559 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1505036332760.jpg -(1849091B / 1.76MB, 3264x2448) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1849091
Just entered college and put my major down as math.
I haven't fucking done math in years. I dropped out! I fucking dropped out because I thought fuck high school, college is where its at. Now I'm fucking here and i have no clue what I'm doing.
Picture is a latern I stole from a meth-head while he was in jail. Its my finest decoration in my dorm.
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
.... - Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:52:29 EST ID:hw7QDM7l No.15568 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1506192749426.jpg -(107796B / 105.27KB, 965x827) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
you can just change your major and if your college offers free tutoring sessions then i suggest you take it until you have a firm understanding of whatever it is your trying to learn
Phyllis Bonderdock - Sat, 23 Sep 2017 21:02:36 EST ID:GW5uULCD No.15569 Ignore Report Quick Reply
sounds hard better quit
James Fuckingspear - Sun, 24 Sep 2017 16:33:03 EST ID:lYjTKStM No.15570 Ignore Report Quick Reply
As somebody who dropped out of studying math after 3 months, don't sweat it.

That said high school math is very different to academic math. You won't be learning calculus or algebra, at least not at the uni.
However you learn about proofs, what you need them for different kinds of proofs and how they are done. You'll need some algebra to follow the exercises and examples, but nothing really substantial.
But you might discover that Math in it's academic form is an ivory tower and if you want to do anything but being a researcher you'd have to find your own interests to do something financially worthwhile in life, which will be if you really like math seem stale in comparison.

If you want to learn something exciting that relates to the real world get out asap.
James Fuckingspear - Sun, 24 Sep 2017 16:37:19 EST ID:lYjTKStM No.15571 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Not that math isn't exciting, it's the most powerful science in existence. But you need to be pretty smart to archive something in it. (By that I mean coming up with a new conjecture or proving a theorem)
Jack Soddleson - Mon, 25 Sep 2017 03:37:41 EST ID:+lsSrhgb No.15572 Ignore Report Quick Reply

An undergraduate degree in math almost always requires taking a sequence of calculus classes that lead in to proof based math. There are many people that get undergraduate degrees in mathematics that go on to work in the private sector successfully. It is inaccurate to say it's in ivory tower field, that is only accurate if you want to become a professional math researcher, which even a large portion of those with math doctorates don't pursue after their thesis.

OP if you're interested in math stick with it. There are jobs out there for people with math aptitude. You will probably have to learn how to program.

Math related jobs are high satisfaction because they generally pay decently and the process of learning various fields of mathematics can be really mentally rewarding depending on your personality.

On the other hand, if you want a more streamlined career progression that follows a pipeline you may want to choose a more professional style of program. If you study math and don't want to become the ivory tower researcher, at some point there is a transition you have to make in to doing real world things that causes even the most intelligent people to "fall off the wagon" sometimes.

Pleb Contemplates Curvature by Pleb - Mon, 23 May 2016 14:22:48 EST ID:BB0KLoxX No.15128 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1464027768468.png -(150891B / 147.35KB, 769x595) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 150891
I am certain i am missing information so i appeal to you brainy smarties to educate me However this also may be a physics questions. I dunno.

Do curves actually exist? Meaning at the smallest point possible (I would assume planck length) would it not be a straight line from point A to point B then a second straight line from point B to point C etc etc? Only upon pulling back far enough to no longer see the individual points does the curve appear?
34 posts and 4 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
David Sobberford - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:56:49 EST ID:KoXeDG6b No.15562 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm pretty distraught to see people trying to answer a mathematics question with physics.
To answer OP's question:
In mathematics, yes curves exist all the time.
In physics, depends which physicist you ask.
Wesley Crecklebot - Thu, 14 Sep 2017 23:14:27 EST ID:kSqLGZD/ No.15563 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The reason that people do math is that there is some hope it corresponds to reality... The issue is whether the mathematical reality corresponds to what is "out there"
Graham Bennernotch - Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:49:55 EST ID:F95jr/F4 No.15565 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Any model of reality discussed in language is "sort of" discrete because language is a discrete medium. However, to the extent that language can describe the idea of continuity at all, it can also encode it in a model of reality, so there is no comprehensible sort of continuousness which cannot also be a property of the Universe. As such it makes no sense to argue that the Universe is discrete because the models are discrete, because "the models are discrete" is not a meaningful statement: all possible models are discrete because the means of communicating them is discrete. Effectively the argument becomes that no continuous universe could contain beings which communicate about said universe in a discrete language, which is clearly silly.
Graham Bennernotch - Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:53:45 EST ID:F95jr/F4 No.15566 Ignore Report Quick Reply
But the setting for qft is R^n (and also C^n) and uses the axioms of real fields which are the "best" mathematical expression of continuity known. If that's not a continuous universe then it isn't possible to talk rigorously about what is
Hannah Bardshaw - Sat, 23 Sep 2017 08:29:57 EST ID:lYjTKStM No.15567 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Calculus is an excellent "language" to describe a continuous real world property.

Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.