conversation_id int64 1 206k | help_channel stringlengths 6 7 | __rowid__ stringlengths 32 32 | author_id int64 62,061,868B 1,071,443,446B | author_name stringlengths 2 32 | timestamp stringlengths 19 19 | content stringlengths 0 3.97k | reference.messageId stringclasses 3
values | reference.channelId stringclasses 3
values | reference.guildId stringclasses 1
value | url stringlengths 0 591 | fileName stringlengths 0 513 | student int64 0 1 | helper int64 0 1 | references.id float64 62,061,868B 1,071,056,124B ⌀ | references.name stringlengths 2 32 ⌀ | references.discriminator stringlengths 4 4 ⌀ | references.nickname stringlengths 1 32 ⌀ | references.isBot bool 2
classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1,930 | help-10 | c75e43af73184e218046f5b23127cb24 | 965,254,002,163,978,200 | Tara | 04/17/2022 10:31:53 | alrighty | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,930 | help-10 | c75e43af73184e218046f5b23127cb24 | 581,500,765,068,329,000 | TheDoktor | 04/17/2022 10:31:53 | Np | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,931 | help-10 | d8d4a17f393b4b17a9333a6eba27e814 | 289,625,979,331,149,800 | Mikazuki | 04/17/2022 11:13:11 | There is a pet with 8 skill slots , now it has 8 skills ABCDEFXY and the target is to change the skills to ABCDEFGH. If you use a skill book , it will randomly replace one skill slot with the new skill like I use skill book G and it replace B it becomes AGCDEFXY. What is the expected value of skill books in order to ... | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 12:43:12 | How do I determine the shortest possible distance between these two functions? | Skarmavbild_2022-04-17_kl._18.42.54.png | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | ||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 356,908,116,429,897,700 | Kaynex | 04/17/2022 12:49:20 | Shortest possible *vertical* distance?
Then you want to minimize:
h(x) = e^x - 2x | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 510,789,298,321,096,700 | TeXit | 04/17/2022 12:49:56 | Results provided by WolframAlpha | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 13:04:18 | How do I minimize that? h'(x) = 0? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:04:47 | h'(x) = 0 will give you all the extreme points except perhaps the endpoints. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:04:57 | So, it can give you minima or maxima. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 13:05:14 | And we're interested in the minimum? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:05:17 | Right. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 13:05:55 | Is this right? | Skarmavbild_2022-04-17_kl._19.05.46.png | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | ||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:06:02 | So, h''(x) > 0 will happen at the minima since the slope (first derivative) is increasing at a minimum. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:06:53 | Yes, that looks good. Check h''(ln(2)) > 0 to ensure it's a minimum. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:07:03 | Unless you're allowed to just look at the graph. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 325,570,175,594,135,550 | Big xdddd | 04/17/2022 13:24:27 | so ln(2) is the minimum distance between these two graphs? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:24:41 | No, that's the x value it happens at. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:25:01 | You need to fill that x into the two functions to see how far apart they are there. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 325,570,175,594,135,550 | Big xdddd | 04/17/2022 13:25:28 | e^ln(2)-2*ln(2) is the distance? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:25:39 | Yes, that's right. | 0 | 1 | 581,500,765,068,329,000 | TheDoktor | 5187 | TheDoktor | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 325,570,175,594,135,550 | Big xdddd | 04/17/2022 13:25:46 | damn thats cool | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 325,570,175,594,135,550 | Big xdddd | 04/17/2022 13:25:47 | thank you | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:25:56 | And e^ln(2) can be simplified to 2. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:25:58 | No problem. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 356,908,116,429,897,700 | Kaynex | 04/17/2022 13:26:56 | Minimum *vertical* distance. A neat challenge to find the minimum actual distance | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 13:51:49 | @Chai T. Rex Is it possible to set up a function using the distance formula, then get the derivative for it to find the shortest distance or? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:54:30 | Yes, if you want the shortest distance, not the shortest vertical distance. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 13:55:26 | @AuHasard | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 13:59:08 | I tried to find on Google, but why can't we find the shortest vertical distance using the distance formula? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 13:59:22 | You want to minimize vertical distance right | 0 | 1 | 356,908,116,429,897,700 | Kaynex | 7520 | Kaynex | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 13:59:40 | Distance formula is not vertical distance | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:00:48 | @Umbraleviathan ”2D distance formula gives the shortest distance between two points in a two-dimensional plane.” | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:01:03 | what we have in our q is also two points. | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:01:11 | so why doesn't it work more specifically? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:02:04 | Hm | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:02:37 | Atcually | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:02:42 | It should work if x is the same throughout | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:02:48 | But that's so redundant | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:05:27 | what's redundant? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:05:36 | so the distance formula can be used? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:10:46 | ,w √((ln(2)-ln(2))^2+(2-2ln(2))^2 | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 510,789,298,321,096,700 | TeXit | 04/17/2022 14:11:09 | Results provided by WolframAlpha | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:11:32 | @Umbraleviathan@Chai T. Rex | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:11:32 | @Umbraleviathan@Chai T. Rex | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:11:43 | isn't this the same answer? | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:12:02 | this is the distance formula | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:13:11 | ,w e^ln(2) - 2ln(2) | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 510,789,298,321,096,700 | TeXit | 04/17/2022 14:13:14 | Results provided by WolframAlpha | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:14:36 | @AuHasard Yes, that works, but it's not the easiest way. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:15:23 | @Chai T. RexWhy, in your opinion? | 1 | 0 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 7323 | Chai T. Rex | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:15:45 | Because the first term is always 0. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:15:58 | Then the second term is just sqrt(something²). | 0 | 1 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 4068 | AuHasard | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:16:08 | Which is essentially |something|. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:16:17 | Which, since it's nonnegative is just something. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:16:32 | You'll find out that it'll be f(x)-g(x) in the long run | 0 | 1 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 4068 | AuHasard | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:16:46 | And you might as well maximize f(x)-g(x) from the get go | 0 | 1 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 3607 | Umbraleviathan | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:16:56 | what happens is this | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:17:34 | $\sqrt{(x-x)^2 + (f(x)-g(x))^2}$ | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:17:50 | What the | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:17:52 | \sqrt | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 510,789,298,321,096,700 | TeXit | 04/17/2022 14:17:58 | **Umbraleviathan** | 349354952961032192.png | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | ||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:17:59 | You know I'm smart | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:18:18 | This is just f(x) - g(x) | 0 | 1 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 3607 | Umbraleviathan | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:20:40 | √(f(x)-g(x))² = f(x) - g(x), yeh | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:21:00 | but don't we get our answer faster this way | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:21:10 | what do you think | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:21:23 | No, because you have to calculate f(x) - g(x) for both. | 0 | 1 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 3607 | Umbraleviathan | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:21:38 | And the distance formula has you doing extra work besides that to get the same thing. | 0 | 1 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 7323 | Chai T. Rex | false | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:22:05 | Just f(x) - g(x) is the simplest. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:22:28 | Okay thanks | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 04/17/2022 14:22:33 | No problem. | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,932 | help-10 | 63b83fbcfe83458292df65da84ebc775 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 04/17/2022 14:22:36 | .close | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 04/17/2022 14:23:10 | No because knowing you want to minimize vertical distance, that just follows the suit f(x) - g(x) | 1 | 0 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 4068 | AuHasard | false | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 14:35:55 | B here is a banach space and (1) is any series.
I understand why absolutely implies unconditionally, but how can I show the other direction?
(This is from ABSOLUTE AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVERGENCE IN NORMED LINEAR SPACES By A. DVORETZKY AND C. A. ROGERS) | unknown.png | 0 | 1 | 537,482,727,557,955,600 | Chai T. Rex | 7323 | Chai T. Rex | false | ||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:18:26 | So this is a bit above my level regarding series (I just looked up the definition of unconditionally convergent), but maybe this can be a starting point (I'm using a the idea of positive/negative so I guess it doesn't work for not totally ordered fields unless you can generalize it) ?
By contraposition: let's take a se... | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:31:44 | I'm assuming by way of contradiction, that although the series converges unconditionally, it does not converges absolutely?
And now I'm rearranging the elements... In what way... ? Something to do with the positive and negative factors of a chosen basis ?
I think I lost you. Can you be a bit more rigorous? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:32:51 | "I'm assuming by way of contradiction" I said by contraposition: not ACV => not UCV so UCV => ACV | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:33:38 | sorry, I misread | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:35:23 | as I'm trying to detail this I realized that even just talking about coordinates is weird because ACV is done looking at a series in R+, so that already is problematic | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:37:15 | but by triangular inequality it works | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:37:21 | we can use the max norm, according to some basis, since all norms are equivalent | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:37:33 | if it helps? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:38:24 | my idea was to go to a single coordinate so that the things we sum are in a field and not a vector space, thus simpler to work with | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:39:54 | so then since the series doesn't ACV it implies that for one dimension the series of the vector's coordinates in that dimension doesn't ACV | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:41:56 | then if (for now with loss of generality) we were in a R vector space, we know that we could rearrange the sum (as it converges, because we easily restrict ourselves to the study of convergent series) to converge to different values with different permuations | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:42:02 | and that's what you wanted me to detail ? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:42:23 | The fact that different permutations can converge to different values ? | 0 | 1 | 510,789,298,321,096,700 | TeXit | 0796 | TeXit | true | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:43:12 | Let me think for a minute, see if I understand | 0 | 1 | 349,354,952,961,032,200 | Umbraleviathan | 3607 | Umbraleviathan | false | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 15:46:19 | If we are in one dimension R, we can split the series to its positive and negative values, sum of two series, assuming that it doesn't converge absolutely, one of them must not converge. Therefore by rearranging the terms we get a series that does not converge. Thus the 1 dimensional case (I think) is solved, right? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:48:33 | if the series converges but not absoutely, both the sum of the negatives and of the positives go to their respective infinity. So if you want a sum that converges to L, (wlog L >= 0) you just add positive terms until you're above L, then add negative terms until you're below L, and repeat. There's a permutation that do... | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:49:05 | but I don't know how to generalize this to non-ordered fields | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 15:53:42 | do you have any idea if/how we might generalize this ? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 16:04:17 | no, but it's getting late where I'm at, so I think I'm done with math for the day, and hopefully I will get back to it tomorrow | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 16:05:19 | should I close even though it is not resolved? | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 16:05:46 | if you're going to bed the bot will probably close it during the night anyways | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 16:06:53 | I will let it close when the time comes if so, just in case someone will have an idea I could check in the morning | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 484,702,191,156,985,860 | themateo713 | 04/17/2022 16:07:29 | I'd recommend pinging helpers to people are more likely to have a look at it | 0 | 1 | 933,153,827,648,045,200 | AuHasard | 4068 | AuHasard | false | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 04/17/2022 16:09:21 | @Helpers | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | null | null | |||||
1,933 | help-10 | a65f8695979c4efdb385735979c4d70c | 261,933,205,387,477,000 | riemann | 04/17/2022 16:21:00 | I almost never see helpers be able to answer questions on Banach Spaces. Maybe the question is better suited for #adv-analysis | 0 | 1 | 236,469,292,676,153,340 | eternalStudent | 2025 | eternalStudent | false | |||||
1,934 | help-10 | 1397cd45fd54413fbfb317434e4f773f | 357,974,039,425,187,840 | will159454 | 04/17/2022 21:13:29 | unknown.png | 1 | 0 | null | null | null | null | null |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.