#quotients

[roots-of-unity1282]

How about a kitty and quotient vector spaces?

[judgingbooksbycovers]

Quotients

By Tracy O’Neill.

[universitybookstore]

New from Soho, Quotients: A Novel, by Tracy O’Neill.  Two people search for connection in a world of fractured identities and aliases, global finance, big data, intelligence bureaucracies, algorithmic logic, and terror. (Read the review in Ploughshares here.)

[psych-101-blog]

ON IQ, EQ, and AQ

My mom always told me, “You might have a high IQ, but that matters little when you don’t improve your EQ and AQ.” Of course, the “high IQ” allowed me to infer that EQ was about emotions and me needing to know how to control them, but what was AQ? I’ve completely forgotten about it.

AQ stands for Adversity Quotient, or the ability to respond to change or challenges that come across one’s way. After searching for it just recently, I then realized how much I needed to improve this part of me more than I should try to understand my emotions which I already have a basic grasp of. Key word here is “grasp”. AQ also measures for how much one feels like they have control over a situation. This also shows how much one can handle any situation, with a low level AQ being more timid towards the situation, easily falling into despair upon one tiny thing failing in front of their very eyes, while a high level AQ is more resilient, adaptable to even the smallest of setbacks, and more positively aggressive with their methods, unafraid of the unknown. I would personally say how little AQ I have, with what, always being mad at everything not going my way, sad over the smallest of rejections, and highly disappointed when a certain professor whose veterancy allows him to flex over the system and make us do things against the curriculum. I’ll never understand office politics.

EQ stands for Emotional Quotient, or how a person assesses their emotions, effectively signifying whether one is in control of them or not. Over the course of my life, I’ve found that my opinion on emotions, much like a lot of my other opinions, have changed. In particular, I don’t feel that controlling my emotions should be my main priority. Rather, I should use my AQ to firstly assess the situation and then choose whether or not to apply or withhold my current emotional state to the parties involved. It’s isn’t much of “controlling” but more of pulling the lever of either emotion or no emotion. I absolutely still hate when I’m being repressed from expression. This expressive nature of mine is an identity I hold valuable to function as a person in society, and being unable to show how I feel about something kills me slowly inside. I would cite my case of a nearly year-old crush that had to take September before I finally did something about it. The feeling started happy, as with a lot of crushes do, but as time passed by, overthinking and everything included, I started to feel the anxiety. Something I thought I’d never feel given my personal evaluation of my mental fortitude. The latter half of my secret admiration was slowly consuming me internally that it felt lesser and lesser of a crush as more and more negativity crept towards me with each passing day. Well, at least I got that out of the way already. Point is, only futility is found when one is fixated on feeling.

Just let me feel, okay? XD

And the perfect song for me that fits this entire theme: Emoji by Pegboard Nerds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P14Qp4hqWFg

- mod der

[odakuzhal-blog]

1. Physical Quotient

2.IQ

3.Emotional Quotient

4,Memory Quotient

5.Spiritual Quotient

6.Passion Quotient

7.Concentration Quotient

8.Sleeping Quotient

===============*************************=============

Add to it

9. Time Management Quotient

10.Getting Things Done Quotient

11.Decision Quotient

12.Delegation and Inspiring Quotient

14.Akratic Quotient (The measure of command over oneself)

15. Discipline Quotient

16.Knowledge Quotient

17.Thinking and Analytic Quotient

[sucyuneautreinfo]

Oui à l'équité ! Non à un semblant d'égalité !

Depuis plusieurs années, nous nous élevons contre les anomalies liées à l'utilisation de la grille des quotients familiaux à Sucy-en-Brie. Nous insistons afin que soient créées deux tranches supplémentaires pour les plus hauts revenus : l'une allant de 1 601 € (plafond actuel) jusqu'à 2 000 €, une autre au-delà de 2000 € et nous demandons que tous les tarifs soient rééquilibrés en conséquence. Nous n'acceptons pas, comme l'a fait Mme le Maire encore cette année, une hausse uniforme des tarifs ; soit le même taux de 2 % appliqué à toutes les tranches de revenus. C'est une pratique qui donne l'illusion d'une égalité de traitement envers tous.

Nous ne demandons pas, nous, une égalité de traitement entre petits et gros revenus, nous demandons l'équité : que chacun paie au prorata de ses ressources !

Deux exemples pour comprendre ce qui se fait jusqu'ici à Sucy :

- L'an dernier, une famille en classe D payait son repas seulement 83 centimes de moins que celle de la classe A qui avait des revenus doubles.

- Une famille en classe H payait sa journée de classe d'environnement seulement moitié moins cher que celui de la classe A qui gagnait 5 fois plus qu'elle.

Est-ce cela l'équité ? Non ! Nous demandons un calcul équitable pour chaque famille et que le coût du service soit effectivement proportionnel aux revenus, c'est ainsi que nous concevons la justice sociale !

Nous demandons également que les pièces justificatives des revenus demandées aux familles excluent la copie du jugement de divorce, pour établir ce quotient. Un simple extrait d'acte de naissance suffit pour savoir si la personne est divorcée ou non. Quant au montant de la pension alimentaire, il figure sur la feuille d'imposition. Comment procède-t-on avec les couples non mariés, non pacsés, et qui se séparent ? Soyons vigilants, mais évitons des intrusions inutiles et humiliantes dans la vie des familles. De surcroît, alléger la paperasserie, ce serait effectuer un pas vers la simplification administrative souhaitée !

[lawsofemotion]

Products and Quotients of Functions

Formulas

Consider the functions: f(x) = (x + 2)² - 5 and g(x) = 3x - 4. Determine the function of h(x) = (f · g)(x). To determine the equation for this function use the above formulas given. Since h(x) = (f · g)(x) is the equivalent to h(x) = f(x) · g(x), use this formula to create the equation. Original formula: h(x) = f(x) · g(x) Substitute f(x) and g(x) values. h(x) = ((x + 2)² - 5) · (3x - 4) Simplify. h(x) = ((x + 2)² - 5) · (3x - 4) h(x) = ((x² + 4x + 4) - 5) · (3x - 4) h(x) = (x² + 4x -1) · (3x - 4) h(x) = 3x³ - 4x² + 12x² - 16x - 3x + 4 h(x) = 3x³ + 8x² - 19x + 4 State the domain and range of h(x). To determine the domain and range of h(x), use f(x)’s and g(x)’s domain and range to understand which values must be included. f(x) Domain:  {x|x∈R} Range: {y|y ≥ -5} g(x) Domain: {x|x∈R} Range: {y|y∈R} Since both domains are the same, this will also be h(x)’s domain. Since this is a cubic function, the range will be consisting of all reals. h(x) Domain: {x|x∈R} Range: {y|y∈R}

Consider the functions: f(x) = x² + x - 6 and g(x) = 2x + 6. Determine the equation of the function h(x) = (g/f)(x). To determine the equation for this function use the above formulas given. Since h(x) = (g/f)(x) is the equivalent to h(x) = g(x) / f(x), use this formula to create the equation. Original formula: h(x) = g(x) / f(x) Substitute f(x) and g(x) values. h(x) = (2x + 6) / (x² + x - 6) Simplify. h(x) = 2(x + 3) / (x + 3)(x - 2) h(x) = 2 / (x - 2) Sketch the graphs f(x), g(x), and h(x) on the same coordinate plane. f(x) = x² + x - 6, therefore it will be a parabolic function.

g(x) = 2x + 6, therefore it will be a linear function.

h(x) = 2 / (x - 2), therefore it will be a reciprocal function.

State the domain and range of h(x). To determine the domain of h(x), go back to the unsimplified h(x) and state the non-permissible values for the domain. h(x) Domain: {x|x ≠ -3, 2}

To determine the range of h(x), compare f(x)'s range and g(x)'s range to use restricted values.

f(x) Range: {y|y ≥ -25/4}

g(x) Range: {y|y∈R}

Therefore, the range for h(x) is {y|y ≠ 0, -25/4}