#math rant

[tabris-the-seventeenth-angel]

sososososososo mad. sat prep question is

f(x) = 9(4)^x and g(x) = f(x + 2). find g(x)

and any sane fucking person would say g(x) = 9(4)^(x + 2). BECAUSE THAT'S NORMAL. BASIC COMPOSITION OF FUNCTIONS.

but no. nonononono. the answer is. g(x) = 144(4)^x. through some bullshit graph movement. fuck off

i'm never fucking using that method. like literally why would i. it's infinitely easier to substitute x + 2 in for x and it does not even matter if i have a value for x. i'm hjgkasdhjgkasdfhgasdfjklgsdfhjakl fuck offfffffff man

[b-theshittyhuman]

[Warning: probably some poor math. If you are proficient at math, feel free to share your thoughts and any corrections/adjustments that might need to be made]

Alright, let me get this straight: so 1/0 IS an actual number with an actual value. It has to be, otherwise straight vertical lines don't exist. But it is also undefined

The reason why it is undefined is because as n→0+, 1/n= ∞. [1/1=1, 1/(1/2)=2, 1/(1/10)=10, etc...]

HOWEVER, as n→0–, 1/n= –∞. [1/(–1)=–1, 1/(–1/2)=-2, 1/(–1/10)=–10, etc...]

Therefore, as n→0, 1/n= both ∞ and (–∞). So does that mean 1/0 is simultaneously –∞ AND +∞, and not either-or like you would see when f(a)=f(–a)=0?

I don't even know how that would look, physically and mathematically

But if that is the case and we denote ± as being plus AND minus, rather than plus OR minus, it would mean that 0×(±∞)=1, as well as 1/(±∞)=0

[Side tangent: How would 0×(±∞) even look as repeated addition? Coz that's what multiplication is. Maybe 0±0±...±0? Or perhaps ±1(0+0+...+0)? Same thing actually, but it still makes no sense. How can you add and subtract something at the same time and still change its value?]

Which again, I don't understand, but it does explain why 1/0 is undefined, because it has two simultaneous values (which, from my understanding, only exist as concepts and not actual values) despite it being a constant

Have I got all of this right?

And why can't we just allow the existence of constants with simultaneous values in mathematics? Could certainly help in defining 1/0. But then, what else would it apply to? And its not like we constantly came across it like with √–1. 1/0 is just weird

[I also want to point out that if 1/(±∞)=0, does 0 actually have no value?]

[badfaithdiscourse]

÷ is the most counterintuitive symbol in math; if 2 ÷ 4(3) is either 1/6 or 3/2 depending on interpretation then it's not fulfilling its purpose effectively

[fartsicleguzzler]

I won’t tell anyone if i learn how to do trigonometry… but there will be sines

[deckledswing489]

everyone's so hyped about 4 dimensions because "oh this is beyond our comprehension but do you realise a 4d being would know our dirty 3d secrets like we would a little 2d guy's"

but i've been thinking, the little 2d guys are also beyond our comprehension (my comprehension at least)! im simply having a hard time conceptualising how a little 2d guy (assuming such a guy could exist) would see anything (assuming it has little little 2d guy eyes), because 1d lines are essentially invisible. and don't even get me started with how they would move...

anyway this is the same way a flat 2d square would be to us 3d people be invisible when laid coincidental/parallel to our line of vision (on its "edge"), the only way to see the square would be to rotate it on a perpendicular axis to not be parallel or combine it with other 2d squares to make it 3d

but the little 2d guys don't have that ability! because, you guessed it, they're in a two-dimensional plane, which have zero depth! there are no perpendicular lines!

there is one way to solve this conundrum, though. let's be juuust a little silly and... assume... that 1d lines do have depth; this would mean all 1d lines are now actually 2d, and by extension the little 2d guy is now 3d, and now we can see the edge of planes and lines

and so can our little 2d guy! everybody happy

moral of the story is that math is about assuming things (begrudgingly) and you can't have the good stuff if you don't get a little silly with it

[unoriginal104]

So like, I was learning sets today in my maths class. And OH MY GOD, domains are way too stuck up their own asses. Like, you get to be called domain, but that set right next to you, oh no no, that's not as important as ME. You get to be called CO-domain. Oh, and it's irrelevant if in a function more if my elements get attached to one of yours, it's still a function. But oh, don't you dare attached two of yours on a single one of mine! It will not longer be a function! Also, i always come up first because I'm SO important. Like bitch-

I've had enough of this discrimination! I want equal rights for Co-Domains. WHOS WITH ME, HUH?

[astrologamage]

As a math teacher, I always get the question “why are we learning this?” And I hate it. Like fair question but why aren’t you asking the same of any other subject? Why do you learn about molecular geometry? There’s no particular reason for you to know the significance of Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet. No one is going to quiz you on the role of the US in WWII. And yet you learn all of those things because you understand that you are learning more than just that. You are learning how to test hypotheses, analyze texts, and connect moments from the past to the future.

Why can’t math be the same?

[art-of-mathematics]

I do not know if it is common outside of Germany, but, like, all German websites about derivation rules are like... "Just apply the rule written in the table"... you only have to memorize the derivation rules - like. That is not the point of math! Simply memorizing is not the point of learning!! It's not the point of learning anything to just apply without understanding what is actually done. This is waste of memory capacity and also does the creative skill of mathematical thinking no justice!

It's like so awful! And takes away not just the beauty, but also the fun and personality outta mathematics.

If there is one thing I love the most about math: It is NOT arbitrary. All its rules are not plainly made-up, but can be 'derived' by using and combining underlying mechanisms/principles.

THAT is the point of math! To see the same world differently!

Also: Logic is a wonderfully abstract form creativity, and it should be treated as such!

PS: I HATE the wholehearted empathise and general acceptance for the hate of mathematics - especially when mathematics is condemned as something which is merely the opposite of its true and real nature.