wtf
wtf
Okay, okay, I almost got it. I'm 3/384 off of the answer....
karmas to whomever points out my mistake. it's just algebra..
ed: answer is -11/384
karmas to whomever points out my mistake. it's just algebra..
ed: answer is -11/384
Last edited by Bevo (2009-12-02 20:48:01)
I'm a photographer for my schools year book. I also do layouts. So I have to call seniors in for their senior section, take their photo and then have htem turn in a survey so we can have an idea about what to write about. Problem is I have to call slip the kids during 2nd and don't actually get to talk to them. I staple the survey to the call slip and give them a week to turn it back into me and come to me to have their picture taken.
Well, half the time I get sports page idiots who never return their shit. I mean, I gave you a week to fill out a few questions. Hell i even gave you my phone number if you need information. So then I have to go to their class, go IN their class, and fucking babysit these idiots and have them do it right there. Then it makes ME look bad because I miss the deadline.
I mean COME ON
Well, half the time I get sports page idiots who never return their shit. I mean, I gave you a week to fill out a few questions. Hell i even gave you my phone number if you need information. So then I have to go to their class, go IN their class, and fucking babysit these idiots and have them do it right there. Then it makes ME look bad because I miss the deadline.
I mean COME ON
[sin^8(x)/8]+[sin^6(x)/6] {(pi/2) to (3pi/4)}
(-1/128 + 1/48) - (-1/8 + 1/6)
(5/384) - (1/24)
(-11/384) <= ANSWER
That what you're looking for?
(-1/128 + 1/48) - (-1/8 + 1/6)
(5/384) - (1/24)
(-11/384) <= ANSWER
That what you're looking for?
yes... thanks -_-WldctARCHe wrote:
[sin^8(x)/8]+[sin^6(x)/6] {(pi/2) to (3pi/4)}
(-1/128 + 1/48) - (-1/8 + 1/6)
(5/384) - (1/24)
(-11/384) <= ANSWER
That what you're looking for?
ed: where'd you get -1/128 and 1/48 from? I don't see how with sin(3pi/4) = sqrt2/2
Last edited by Bevo (2009-12-02 23:06:01)
Got one more... it's due in the morning so if any of the euros have any ideas, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm truly at a loss.
The problem is the integral of (X^2 + 2x - 1)/(X^3 - X)
The answer is (according to wolfram) 2(x^3 - x)-(2x^3 + X^2 - 1)ln(X^3 - X) + C
my answer was ln(x/x^2 - 1) + C
a picture of how I tried to/what my work was, it's kind of blurry.
Basically split up the denominator into x, x-1, x+1, set the numerators for A, B, C, solve for A, B, C, separate the integrals and solve. This is the process I should use, but apparently I messed up somewhere.
The problem is the integral of (X^2 + 2x - 1)/(X^3 - X)
The answer is (according to wolfram) 2(x^3 - x)-(2x^3 + X^2 - 1)ln(X^3 - X) + C
my answer was ln(x/x^2 - 1) + C
a picture of how I tried to/what my work was, it's kind of blurry.
Basically split up the denominator into x, x-1, x+1, set the numerators for A, B, C, solve for A, B, C, separate the integrals and solve. This is the process I should use, but apparently I messed up somewhere.
It's correct, or close, which you'll see if you differentiate the combined natural log you ascertained.
[(sqrt2)/2]^8 = (sqrt2)^8 / 2^8 = 16/256 = 1/16 then divide by 8 = 1/128Bevo wrote:
where'd you get -1/128 and 1/48 from? I don't see how with sin(3pi/4) = sqrt2/2.
and
[(sqrt2)/2)^6 = (sqrt2)^6 / 2^6 = 8/64 = 1/8 then divide by 6 = 1/48
derp! I forgot to re-divide. Thanks.WldctARCHe wrote:
[(sqrt2)/2]^8 = (sqrt2)^8 / 2^8 = 16/256 = 1/16 then divide by 8 = 1/128Bevo wrote:
where'd you get -1/128 and 1/48 from? I don't see how with sin(3pi/4) = sqrt2/2.
and
[(sqrt2)/2)^6 = (sqrt2)^6 / 2^6 = 8/64 = 1/8 then divide by 6 = 1/48
Also as im about to head to class, if you're still here could you glance over the other problem I posted? <3333
Hmm, trying to find the time it takes for a capacitor to reach 1% of it's original charge when discharged through a 100 ohm resistor. It was charged with a 30 volt voltage supply. The capacity is 3.5mF.
I'm using the equation Q(t) = Q0 * e-t/RC
so I get Q(t) / Q0 = e-t/RC
Q(t) / Q0 = 0.01 since I'm looking for 1% of the original charge
Therefore
ln (0.01) = -t/RC
so -t = ln(0.01) x RC
-t = -1.61 seconds
t = 1.61 seconds
But the answer says 13.2 seconds, is the answer wrong (has happened on numerous occasions) or am I doing something wrong?
I'm using the equation Q(t) = Q0 * e-t/RC
so I get Q(t) / Q0 = e-t/RC
Q(t) / Q0 = 0.01 since I'm looking for 1% of the original charge
Therefore
ln (0.01) = -t/RC
so -t = ln(0.01) x RC
-t = -1.61 seconds
t = 1.61 seconds
But the answer says 13.2 seconds, is the answer wrong (has happened on numerous occasions) or am I doing something wrong?
I get 1.61 too.
Assuming wrong answer in the book then, thanks.
Looks like you're right to me. I tried to see if they actually used 35mF but it came out to 16.something.
I mean the cap is fairly big considering the load resistor, but 13.2 seconds? Seems like a long time.
I mean the cap is fairly big considering the load resistor, but 13.2 seconds? Seems like a long time.
It would take 13ish second to get to 1E-17% of it's original value. lewl
Well, I have an essay due tomorrow for a pointless inquiry class. The professor gave us all different questions to write an essay on and my question is "Is it cost efficient to reduce energy waste?". Well of course it is, but I need 3 arguments, I have two so far and I can't think of a 3rd one, little help please?
a good start would be listing your two arguments so we dont reiterate themRuns_with_sciss0rs wrote:
Well, I have an essay due tomorrow for a pointless inquiry class. The professor gave us all different questions to write an essay on and my question is "Is it cost efficient to reduce energy waste?". Well of course it is, but I need 3 arguments, I have two so far and I can't think of a 3rd one, little help please?
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
aye, for the first argument I was going to do something along the macroeconomic lines, saying that an economy is better off in the long run if you invest in capital or technology.
Second argument is the law of supply and demand.. people using energy, the more wasted energy, demanding more
edit: I can't think of anything for a 3rd one.. and if you could tell me if those two are total shit, they probably are. I have no interest in this kind of stuff.
Second argument is the law of supply and demand.. people using energy, the more wasted energy, demanding more
edit: I can't think of anything for a 3rd one.. and if you could tell me if those two are total shit, they probably are. I have no interest in this kind of stuff.
Last edited by Runs_with_sciss0rs (2009-12-08 20:04:50)
I have a question 2: I asked some other people this too. When writing a research paper, how much content content would you include quotes from other people and such compared yo your own thoughts and so on? How would you go about it provide a quote then explain it or explain some stuff then provide a quote to back it up or to lead it to a new direction. Right now the thing Im doing I have tons of quotes because Im unfamiliar with some of stuff. So any advice and ideas are welcome. Thx
Social benefit is an easy one to use for the third argument. Just say the wasteful processes incur a large social cost that would be reduced were they made more efficient, and naturally that this is a good thing for society.
Awesome, thank you so much. What do you think of my 2 arguments though are they strong? or should I think of something better?nukchebi0 wrote:
Social benefit is an easy one to use for the third argument. Just say the wasteful processes incur a large social cost that would be reduced were they made more efficient, and naturally that this is a good thing for society.
Use the quotes sparingly. You don't want this to come off as an amalgam of a bunch of other people's thoughts, this is supposed to be your paper with your voice. Use a quote or two as a base, then dive right in with your own personal thoughts/analysis. Expound on what that someone else said and go into further detail.blademaster wrote:
I have a question 2: I asked some other people this too. When writing a research paper, how much content content would you include quotes from other people and such compared yo your own thoughts and so on? How would you go about it provide a quote then explain it or explain some stuff then provide a quote to back it up or to lead it to a new direction. Right now the thing Im doing I have tons of quotes because Im unfamiliar with some of stuff. So any advice and ideas are welcome. Thx
Also, you should switch it up with the style. It becomes too predictable/boring if the entire paper is laid out like
Have some parts where you use the quote as a base and jump off it, and then have some parts where you draw your own conclusions and if need be, you can throw some results from other people or other quotes to back it up.So and so said "blah blah". Continuing on this, ...
*next paragraph*
As this person once said, "blah". Furthermore, ...
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|7001
11-16 page paper on anything you want pertaining to the middle east. Ok go.
Ask lowing.Superior Mind wrote:
11-16 page paper on anything you want pertaining to the middle east. Ok go.
To be honest, I'd rephrase the first one in terms of societal improvement (i.e. long-term economic growth) being stifled by the waste, and have that follow as an extension of the point I gave you, and use the SD one in terms of lost consumer surplus/welfare (which you can normatively argue as good.) State the SD one first, then present the couplet second, and you'll have the best rhetorical progression.Runs_with_sciss0rs wrote:
Awesome, thank you so much. What do you think of my 2 arguments though are they strong? or should I think of something better?nukchebi0 wrote:
Social benefit is an easy one to use for the third argument. Just say the wasteful processes incur a large social cost that would be reduced were they made more efficient, and naturally that this is a good thing for society.
Not for me (for my bro), but does anyone have any idea how to solve question 11? I did my intro over 4 years ago so I don't remember shit.
http://web.uvic.ca/~hschuetz/econ103/solutionsmt2.pdf
http://web.uvic.ca/~hschuetz/econ103/solutionsmt2.pdf