>Squid can do calculus >I can't fuck everything

Exactly what part of that is calculus? Why are you watching anime instead of going to school?

>Can you solve this problem? but there isn't a problem there

There's no calc in that, and there's no problem either, it's just a bunch of mathematical symbols without an equals sign.

You could transform each of these lines in problems by adding a equal sign in the end of each one and asking for x. And it would still be piss easy. You're stupid, OP.

I know this is bait and all, but that isn't calculus Its bunch of expressions that can be done by anybody with knowledge of Algebra I

>>101477619 Look on the bright side - your brain does a hell of a lot of complicated mathematics unconsciously.

If those equations were complete it would be incredibly easy OP. Thery are not even polynomial.

1. (x+3)(x+4) 2. 3. x^2 + 10x + 25 4. 5x^2 * (1-3x) 5. 3x^2 + 7x + 3 6. (x+4)(x+4) 7. (3x+1)(x-1) 8. (x+3)(x-4) I don't know if the second one is to the power or 22 or not but here you are.

>Calculus >Implying What the fuck? Do you even know what calculus is? What the fuck is even going on in that, though, now that I think about it.

>>101478276 5 and 8 are wrong, but good effort

>>101478276 8 is (x+6)(x-2) That's the only one i'm willing to check for you

>>101478276 I think the second one says (-a(b^2))^2

>>101478383 Oh my bad 5. 2x^2 + 7x + 3 8. (x+6)(x-2) I did them to quickly

>>101478148 Surely the squid can do twice as much.

>>101477619 >calculus That's algebra you shit head. also nice bait

>>101477619 Have you finished high school?

>japanese show >english numbers what?

>How do I into Quadratic

>>101478747 >english They are arabic numbers, and Japan uses them too.

>>101478747 >english numbers >english >numbers this has to be bait

>>101478747 >English numbers Murrikkan education gentlemen :3

Does anyone have that image of the sheet explaining how ika does math? I want to learn the superior method

>>101478747 this is definitely b8

>>101477619

>>101478010 If each line of this was its own problem, even I could do it. And I'm an English major.

>>101478010 Or do what you're supposed to and set them equal to zero, factor, then solve for X

>>101478747 I bet lots of people actually believe that.

>>101479591 I don't want to live in America if I'm going to get associated with those people.

>>101477619 Your shitty blog thread is already derailing into retards discussing maths. Good going faggot. Reporting like the motherfucking fist of the north star.

>Calculus Post some?

ITT people who have taken higher math. Does anyone want to explain to me how to sketch a solution line on a directional field?

>>101477619 >That picture >Calculus Amerifat education everyone

>silly goy you need these several thousand dollars worth of math credits that have nothing to do with your degree in physical therapy I want off this wild ride but at the same time I'm not autistic and I want more figures.

The squid may be able to do calculus but she is so small compared to the dude. Yay off models!

>>101477619 >S = +1+2+3+4+5+6+7+.... A= +1-1+1-1+1-1+1..... B= +1-2+3-4+5... A= 1/2 2B=1-1+1-1+1-1... 2B=A B=1/4 S-B= 4*S S-(1/4) = 4S S = -(1/12)

>Japanese show >English symbols Wow holy shit the japs need to steal from every language

>>101479982 He is sitting in a lifeguard chair.

>>101479090 It isn't one problem though, it's a whole bunch of different problems independent of each other that the author just put in there to make it look smart

If you assholes are so smart then what's: x = 6 + y

I feel like Ika could do logarithmic differentiation pretty easily.

>>101480180 x = 6 + y

>>101480180 x-6=y

>>101480180 An equation with infinite^1 solutions?

>>101480086 Was he really? Been too long since I saw s1

>>101480295 >>101480300 Retards. It's 6 = x - y

>>101480180 can you repeat the question?

>>101480180 Ｘ＝六＋Ｙ

>>101478854 >Arabic You mean Hindu.

Is there actually any purpose to even know math in this age with Wolfram Alpha?

>>101480448 >Why know anything if google knows it?!?!

>>101480295 >>101480300 >>101480349 Alright alright, I see that was too easy. Maybe let's test your order of operation knowledge. x + (-1 - -2) * 2 = x

>>101480448 You don't learn advanced math to use it. You learn advanced math to get a job because the world is fucked up like that.

>>101480448 Fuck maths, why learnt something when we can leave it to machines. Its not like I want to be a person with culture fuck that.

>>101480500 Impossible.

>>101480500 x = 2 + x

>>101480448 Computer programming often deals heavily with it, and Wolfram Alpha doesn't work, you have to understand a bunch of the logic behind it.

>>101480500 -2=2x x=-2/x

That isn't even a problem. Early calculus ain't even hard, writers and fools just use it as an example of something that only geniuses and spergs can wrap their heads around because they don't know a shit about math.

>>101480585 >>101480617

>>101477619 Most of those stuff barely make any sense unless you add some other variable.

Well, except for the part that that isn't calculus, yeah, you are pretty dumb if you can't solve that.

>>101480698 Well you can actually factorize most of them.

>>101478747 Jesus christ, I can't believe there's people like this guy in the world.

>>101480448 >wolfram alpha Can't do a fraction of the things Mathematica can, which is intended. >computer programs can do all maths Only said by people with almost no math or computer science knowledge.

>>101480682 x - 7 = 19 + x x - 7 - 19 = x x + 12 = x x - x = 12 0 = 12 Easy as fuck and I'm a liberal arts major.

>>101480425 They're known as Arabic numerals, despite Fibonacci introducing them to the West as the "method of the Indians."

>>101480448 Well actually understanding the math will in the end be much easier and more efficient that rote memorization of "I need to put this into WolframAlpha to get this thing" if you're actually doing something that requires applied math.

It's just factoring and expanding shit Literally algebra 1

>>101480766 It's just elementary school stuff.

>>101477619 >this >calculus So you're telling me you didn't even get to basic algebra?

>>101480760 You can only factor them if you're told they're equal to zero Which we aren't so

>>101480500 x∈ℤ\2

>>101480448 >JewframAlpha Torrent Mathematica. Made by the same Jews but you aren't giving them traffic and don't have to pay for half of the features.

>>101480765 >Only said by people with almost no math or computer science knowledge. Name one mathematical function a computer isn't better at. Computer program does not mean "wolfram alpha", computer program could mean a bunch of math implemented in C or Fortran.

>>101477619 math is for fags #thuglyfe

>>101480640 what the hell are you even doing?

>>101480890 Please let me know how the math magically gets into the computer in the first place without anyone knowing it.

>>101480771 What. Fibonacci introduced them as Arabic numbers because he didn't know they were from India. The Arabs picked it up from the Hindi, and today in actual mathematics they're called either the Hindu numbers or the Hindu-Arabic numbers.

>>101480890 >all of math is evaluating functions Again, said only by people with no math background whatsoever.

>>101480760 That (x+5)² does not lead to what it suggests, same goes for the (2x+1)(x+3). There's shitton of quadratic equations and you could just find their roots to lead to the prime form and that's it, all the equations have no relation to each other.

>>101480950 He called the process of using numerals in digits to do basic arithmetic "modus Indorum." I'm quoting that from Wikipedia. I only remembered that he convinced people to stop using god damn dots on paper to represent an abacus.

>>101480890 lol, calculating determinants of matrices. they're using the fucking leibniz formula. anyway look at my email now back to >>>/out/

>>101480936 By people writing computer programs. That was the point of my reply. Computer programs can do all math that is currently possible, and better than any human could. You seem to think of computer program as "The calculator that comes with Windows". Here's another example of a computer program def square(x): return x * x >>101480991 You have no background in computer science obviously.

>>101481114 Well huh, didn't realize that. Thought he started everyone calling them Arabic. Guess Europeans just decided to be lazy about naming afterwards.

>>101481229 And what happens when you're working on math at a level before the concept of a function is defined? Some areas of math can get extremely abstract, to the point where they can't be represented by computers.

>>101481229 >def square(x) >Using preprocessor macros >Using them for the problem that is used as an example for why you shouldn't use macros

>>101481229 >>101481116

>>101479793 Come on man, OP could be from any country in the world.

>>101481229 And let's say there's no math experts. Who's going to come up with the math to write your efficient algorithms huh? Take the determinant example from this guy here: >>101481116 Calculating the determinant directly would require order N! calculations. Calculating it by using gaussian elimination would only require order N^3 calculations. But if you're a code monkey who just write the most naive programs possible then you'll be stuck with the first (extremely) inefficient algorithm. It's pretty obvious you have no expertise on anything.

>>101481369 I distinctly remember having that as one of the first examples shown to you for defining functions in SICP. Of course it was Lisp though. You saying SICP is wrong? >>101481351 >Some areas of math can get extremely abstract, to the point where they can't be represented by computers. The program gets more complex. I don't think you realize the kind of math that can and be implemented in programming languages. There's literally nothing that a human does better.

>Can you solve this problem? >No problem in sight. Fucking squids.

>>101481500 >There's literally nothing that a human does better. Proofs.

>>101481500 It's used as an example because it's simple to understand. But using the square(x) macro means that you're going to get undetectable code errors any time you find a situation when that x has a ++ or -- operator attached, since square++ wouldn't return the square++, but x++*x++. And that's just an example. Any kind of function macro dependant on numbers breaks down when there's the least bit of variation applied. If you need to have a function written a lot of times with variations, just use templates.

>>101481488 >And let's say there's no math experts. Who's going to come up with the math to write your efficient algorithms huh? If there was no math experts then they wouldn't be written. You are not getting the point. I am clarifying your incorrect definition of computer program, because you seemed to not understand what that meant. You said >>computer programs can do all maths >Only said by people with almost no math or computer science knowledge. Because you didn't realize that "computer program" could just mean mathematical functions in a file written in a programming language.

>>101481702 TSP now shut the fuck up, faggot.

>>101481500 And I don't think you realize what higher math is really like. Sounds to me like you haven't really had any math beyond the Calculus.

>>101479793 >implying you wouldn't become American given the chance

>>101478865 This is clearly bait, I went to murrkican PUBLIC SCHOOL and I know that they're aribic numerals.

>>101481664 Can you give me an example of what you're talking about? x doesn't mean anything globablly, it's just inside the function. http://pastebin.com/4hDu5BmZ Returns 1 1 2 4 3 9

>>101482046 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14041453/why-are-preprocessor-macros-evil-and-what-are-the-alternatives

>>101481229 How the fuck do they get to the point where someone can write a computer program about it? Do you think new math just appears out of thin air, waiting for someone to turn it into a program?

>>101481702 So you're saying computer programs doing math can mean someone writing math down in a word processor? News flash: Latex doesn't come up with the math itself, somebody had to sit down and work out the details before typing it. You said: >Computer programs can do all math that is currently possible, and better than any human could. How about this: write a computer program (or at least outline one) that can prove, from scratch, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. It's an extremely basic formula that undergrads can easily learn in their second year, so you can easily show off your claim on it. Go ahead. I'll wait.

>>101482951 I got this one, boys. import urllib2 urllib2.urlopen('http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy%E2%80%93Schwarz_inequality').read()

>>101483335 ur 1 cheeky cunt m8

>>101483335 dammit guy you made me literally laugh out loud.

>>101480551 >math >culture This is what Compsci students actually believe.