You must log in or register to comment.
Fake and gay.
No way the engineer corrects the mathematician for using j instead of i.
The mathematician also used “operative” instead of, uh, something else, and “associative” instead of “commutative”
“operative” instead of, uh, something else
I think they meant “operand”. As in, in the way dy/dx can sometimes be treated as a fraction and dx treated as a value.
I think you mean operator. The operand is the target of an operator.
The operand is the target of an operator
Correct. Thus, dx is an operand. It’s a thing by which you multiply the rest of the equation (or, in the case of dy/dx, by which you divide the dy).
I’d say the $\int dx$ is the operator and the integrand is the operand.
You’re misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how “dx can be treated as an [operand]”. And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.
∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y
Or the chain rule:
(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx
In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can “cancel” them through division. This isn’t rigorous maths, but it’s a frequently-useful shorthand.
I do understand it differently, but I don’t think I misunderstood. I think what they meant is the physicist notation I’m (as a physicist) all too familiar with:
∫ f(x) dx = ∫ dx f(x)
In this case, because f(x) is the operand and ∫ dx the operator, it’s still uniquely defined.
My thoughts exactly lol
Right? They got that shit backwards. Op is a fraud. i is used in pure math, j is used in engineering.
That’s hilarious. You’re not seeing what’s going on backwards just like that (as I point at the point going nowhere shitty) in an equation that is finding as many clAEver ways to say something you actually not caring about talking about.
That’s like, "How many time van express the only thing that van’t be done until the 'verse itself tries to do what can’t be done and sever your…
…Oh, I see…you don’t have ([of course, because you can’t have to give {is}) nothing)] to give.
Unable to sea time doesn’t mean we can’t see(k)ER the mAETh.ac(k).cc(k).08
The only thin(g):(k) that doesn’t ever be never, is not at alla hack(g)in(g).G your lackthereof to divi…
Is this a copypasta or are you having a stroke?
Wah, wah, wah…
Not my problem.
Keep trying. /s
As an engineer I fully agree. Engineers¹ aren’t even able to do basic arithmetics. I even cannot count to 10.
¹ Except maybe Electrical engineers. They seem to be quite smart.
10? That’s the name some put to 1e1, right?
Engineer here, I can definitely count to 10 tho
0 1 10
deleted by creator
0 1 everything that comes after is simply summarizes as “many”
Electrical engineers are the ones that use j though (because i is used for current)
I am used for current
Except maybe Electrical engineers.
Yup, I can count just fine to the 10th number in a zero-indexed counting system: black, brown, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, gray, white.
Having worked with electrical engineers, some of them are quite smart, the rest have lead poisoning.
The inner machinations of an electrical engineer is too complicated for me to understand, I think they might be thinking on a higher order to understand these circuits
Thats why I barely passed my electrical engineering class lol
How do we know it’s gay though? OP could be a girl (male)
Sure OP is a girl. Guy In Real Life
Newfag.
(sorry! seemed like the appropriate 4chan reply)
Because it’s 4chan. And there are no women on the Internet on 4chan
Wait bottom mathematican is using j=√-1 instead of i and not the engineer? Because I’m EE gang, and all my homies use j.
I agree. Clearly i is current. What is this i=√-1 nonsense.
[Lapsed] mechanical engineering gang checking in. I was also surprised. Though, tbh, I think it came down to personal preference of the professor more than field-wide consensus.
That part also got me really confused. All the mathematicans I know use i while engineers use i or j depending on the kind of engineer. I’ve never seen a Pikachu engineer using anything other than j.
Pikachu engineer
That’s a fucking favorite now. Keeping that in my back pocket.
OPs boyfriend is obviously an i engineer and hates j engineers. No one can stay angry at mathematicians - engineers on the other hand…
The fun starts when you study quaternions
i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = ijk = −1This can’t be real
They’re actually very useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion
(…I think you may have gotten whooshed…)
Hehe, maybe a little, but wanted to share just in case someone didn’t know :3
I clicked your link, I barely made it out of highschool so I have no idea what any of it means, but I like reading things I shouldn’t understand anyway, sometines it’s so interesting even without understanding.
So I thank you!
Quaternions are the closest we get to lovecraftian horror in real life.
Four dimensional and mostly imaginary, they were carved into a stone bridge by a crazy mathematician in a fit of madness, Lord Kelvin called them “unmixed evil”, and the Mad Hatter from Alice may have been inspired by them.
Also they have been a curiosity at best for a long time, despite the efforts of a
secretQuaternion Society, but they suddenly blew up in usefulness in modern times as they happen to be an easy and fast way for computers to describe rotations in 3D space, so they’re everywhere.Yeah, lovecraftian as shit.
It gets worse actually. You can define a number system using any power of 2 amount of i-like units in a similar relationship to quaternions using the Cayley-Dickson construction
Fascinatingly, you lose some property of the algebra at each step. Quaternions aren’t commutative: ABC != CBA. Octonians aren’t associative: (AB)C != A(BC). Once you get into 16 i’s with subscripts, it really gets crazy.
(Also, I just got the joke. Damnit @[email protected] your serious answer threw me off!)
Hehe, yeah, the joke was too good :P
Maybe a bit too complex for its own good.
this isn’t real
a real mathematician would use
(0, 1)instead ofi
They both bottoms.
operative?
Also mathematicians use i for imaginary, engineers use j. The story does not add up. I have never seen a single mathematician use j for imaginary.
imaJinary
TIL engineers can’t spell for shit.
As an EE, I used both. Def not a mathematician though. Fuck that, I just plug variables into programs now.
I have both mechanical and electrical backgrounds. MEs like I, EEs prefer j
Cannot confirm, we always used i.
Engineer here: mostly use i, but have seen j used plenty. First time I saw j used was by a maths professor.
Interesting I never saw j from a maths person. Friends (from a decade ago!) in electronics eng dep said they use j because i was reserved for current. perhaps the latter depends on the department.
j is pretention when a math doer does it. j is for engineers and you don’t even understand the bubble ratio filtering equation let alone be asking to envision what temp you did the mAEth in.
You got lost in the number of letters instead of realizing the MeTowel’s important presence til that EOTU moment of that manufa turing of Big Black Goles you get to watch it all happen again as Thanos facepalms.
The associativity thing also doesnt make sense.
$\int dx f(x)$ is standard notation for physicists
Yes but everyone knows physicists like weird notations
But the post says before the integral, so I understand what they did would be $dx \int f(x)$, which is disgusting
I love how that wannabe 4chan nerd just got outnerded in the comment section
I think rather
d/dxis the operator. You apply it to an expression to bind free occurrences ofxin that expression. For example,dx²/dxis best understood asd/dx (x²). The notation would be clear if you implement calculus in a program.If not fraction, why fraction shaped?
If you use exterior calculus notation, with d = exterior derivative, everything makes so much more sense
I just think of the definition of a derivative.
dis just an infinitesimally small delta. Sody/dxis literally justlim (∆ -> 0) ∆y/∆x. which is the same aslim (x_1 -> x_0) [f(x_0) - f(x_1)] / [x_0 - x_1].Note:
∆ -> 0isn’t standard notation. But writing∆x -> 0requires another step of thinking:y = f(x)therefore∆y = ∆f(x) = f(x + ∆x) - f(x)so you only need∆xapproaching zero. But I prefer thinkingd = lim (∆ -> 0) ∆.
Me, a language/arts person: “Huh?”
Medical here. “Huh?”
Moron here. “Huh?”
Web dev here. “Huh?”
Webdev not knowing anything about computer science (and thus mathematics)? I am shocked. Shocked!
Fullstack dev here. “Huh?”
As a physicist I can’t understand why would anyone complain about a +jb or $\int dx f(x)$. Probably because we don’t fuck
As a software dude I can see you wrote a regex, I just can’t find out what you’re trying to match.
Pardon my denseness, but is this sarcasm? Since that is a TeX snippet.
Why would a RegEx start with a
$?Yeah, it is. I’m just working with what I have.
Heeyy… So when you need to express something more, well, delicate than just code, you need to use math symbols. For that you can use tex expressions. Modern markdown supports it: just copy and paste the $…$ part into any render engine
I’m scared. I think I’ll generate some backend spec to calm down.
Nooo… You should write spec and generate code, not the other way around
Better plot than 50 Shades of Grey
hehe plot. getit? math and graphs and shit
Lmfao kill yourself
This is the kind of brat I can get behind. 😏
😏
I have no idea what they’re talking about, but I do love a happy ending.
Why would a mathematician use j for imaginary numbers and why would engineer be mad at them?
The only thing I can think of is that the OP studied electrical engineering at some point. But it’s a 4chan story so probably fake anyway.
fake and gay?
I think it might be the wrong way around: Engineers like to use j for imaginary numbers because i is needed for current.
Mathematicians are taught to be elastic with notation, because they tend to be taught many different interpretations of the same theory.
On the other hand engineers use more strict and consistent notation, their classes have a more practical approach.
Using the same notation makes it faster to read and apply math, a more agile approach helps with learning new theories and approaches and with being creative.
sado-mathochist
Well done, truly
Thado-mathocist. The real chad all along.
It makes me wonder if somewhere out there in a multiverse, a community of lisping incels all collectively draw the chad wojak as as an aramaic looking dude.
Can somebody ELI5 this for my troglodyte writer brain?
Integrals are an expression that basically has an opening symbol, and an operation that is written at the end of it that is used also as a closing symbol, looks kinda like:
$ {some function of x} dx.The person basically said “the dx part can be written at the start also, and that would make my so mad :3”:
$ dx {some function of x}.This gets their so mad because understandably this makes the notation non-standard and harder to read, also you’d have to use parentheses if the expression doesn’t just end at the function.
Note: dollar used instead of integral symbol
I also use dollars instead of integral symbols, I don’t do math though.
An integral is usually written like ∫ f(x) dx or alternatively as df(x)/dx. Please note that this is just a way to apply the operation ‘Integration’, like + applies the operation ‘Addition’. There is no real multiplication or division.
But sometimes you can take a shortcut and treat dx as a multiplied constant. This is technically not correct, but under the right circumstances lands you at the same solution as the proper way. This then looks like this ∫ f(y) dy/dx dx = ∫ f(y) dy
Another thing you can do is to move multiplicative constants from inside the Integral to in front of the Integral: ∫ 2f(x) dx = 2 ∫ f(x) dx. (That is always correct btw)
What anon did was combine those two things and basically write ∫ f(x) dx = dx ∫ f(x). Which is nonsensical, but given the above rules not easily disproven.
This is more or less the same tactic used by internet trolls just in a mathy way. Purposefully misinterpreting arguments and information, that cost the other party considerably more energy to discover and rebut. Hence the hate fuck.
