[-] ns1@feddit.uk 2 points 2 weeks ago

You could say something like "the image of exponentiation over...." to mean the set of values created by applying the function once, but it sounds slightly clunky.

Looks like there aren't really very many sets of mostly transcendental numbers that have names. Computational numbers and periods are two of them, I'd guess that both probably contain your set, so you could compare with those to see where it gets you.

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 2 points 2 weeks ago

Fun question! I don't know the answer other than to say it's not just the algebraics because of the Gelfond-Schneider constant

Are you sure this is well-defined? You say that a and b are algebraic but "closure" implies that they could also be any members of S. This might mess up your proof that it's not all the reals if you do mean the closure.

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 15 points 4 weeks ago

Use it to find the mooving average

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 24 points 4 weeks ago

It can feel like that, though I'm sure it's (mostly) not deliberate. Also the sudden jump from straightforward to incomprehensible, accompanied by a comment from the author along the lines of "well duh"

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 63 points 4 weeks ago

All maths papers are like this

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago

I definitely don't get this comic, but I can give us a starting point on the first statement: "moral situations can be described using Kripke Models"-

Kripke Models are based on Modal Logic, which is a way of doing formal logic including definitions of "necessarily" and "possibly". The link between Modal Logic and ethics is Deontic logic, where "necessarily" is taken to mean "obligatory" and "possibly" means "permitted". Sheaves and Topos theory are pure mathematics stuff and "Globo Matho" doesn't mean anything as far as I can tell.

Be sure to let us all know if you find out what this means!

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago

Facebook comment sections on anything scientific are always entertaining!

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 23 points 2 months ago

Sure 0.999...95

Just kidding, the guy on the left is correct.

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 3 points 2 months ago

I thought that too as there is 1 planet too many, but now I think Pluto is the extra. The one between Mars and Neptune is Mercury

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 8 points 3 months ago

!askmath@lemmings.world is one I know of

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 24 points 4 months ago

Counterpoint: if you say you have a number of things, you have at least two things, so maybe 1 is not a number either. (I'm going to run away and hide now)

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_prime

2 -> twin, 4 -> cousin, 6 -> sexy, 8 -> ???

view more: next ›

ns1

joined 1 year ago