• SagXD
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    WTF bro, There is 3 variables.

    Wait? NVM Wait?

    Today I did Calculus for 6 hour straight. So, don’t mind me I am just tired.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    418 hours ago

    I want to believe this is real, but I’m having trouble deciphering how one would “solve” this equation given no variable is referenced outside of the question and k is already isolated and terms simplified.

    • @affiliate
      link
      137 hours ago

      i’m guessing they want you to solve for x by rearranging and then taking arcsin

      • @schema
        link
        5
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Considering the handwriting, it’s probably all written by the same person. But even if it wasn’t, it is very badly written if you had to solve it by making assumptions, imo.

    • @radicalautonomy
      link
      67 hours ago

      It’s called a literal equation. The problem doesn’t state which variable to solve for, but the assumption here is that it is x. Solving literal equations is a basic part of mathematics courses.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        247 hours ago

        I’m a mathematician and I can’t recall a time I’ve ever heard the term “literal equation.” When I was in grade school the instructions were always “solve for x” if x was the variable being solved for.

        • Funkytom467
          link
          36 hours ago

          Maybe it’s not universal but in school literal equation basically meant there were letters instead of numbers.

          It’s the term we use for instance when going from the equation of a line like y=3x+2 to lines in general y=ax+b (a and b in ℝ)

          And i agree it’s a lot better to specify to solve for x (because you can solve for anything or have multiple variables).

          Although x being a variable, and solving for it would be the most logical assumption.

    • @somethingsomethingidk
      link
      2010 hours ago

      Since we’re just making shit up anyway

      Assume k=0 and n is the last natural number. Solved.

        • @radicalautonomy
          link
          5
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          x = arcsin(nk-1) + z(2*pi), such that z is any integer.

          • @affiliate
            link
            27 hours ago

            if n = 0 then k = ∞ and just about any value of x works in this case. however x = arcsin(nk -1) still doesn’t work since 0 * ∞ is not defined. so i think the B grade is fair.

            (this is all assuming we’re working on the riemann sphere)

    • stebo
      link
      fedilink
      119 hours ago

      so you don’t understand sin anymore? or division?

        • stebo
          link
          fedilink
          85 hours ago

          You should sin more, 'cos you’ll go to hell and there you can get a tan

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        99 hours ago

        I haven’t had to do anything with sin, cos or tan in over 20 years and even back then it’s a miracle I managed to pass my advanced math course considering I never understood what they were because it was so badly explained to us…

            • @Feathercrown
              link
              English
              3
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              sin(x) and cos(x) return the side lengths of a triangle with hypotenuse 1 and angle x, like so:

              I also was never taught this, which sucks because it’s such a useful concept.

              You can verify that if the angle (x) was 0, cos(x) would be 1, and sin(x) would be 0. If the angle was 90 degrees (vertical), then cos(x) would be 0 and sin(x) would be 1. If the angle was 45 degrees, cos(x) and sin(x) would have the same value, because the triangle sides would have the same length.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                133 minutes ago

                But why?

                See, I was taught this, but no one could every answer why sine and cosine worked the way they did.

                This definition just explains how they work with triangles. What’s the actual definition of each, and how was that derived? I can apply them all day long yet I still can’t tell you what either one means.

                I had the same issues with different kinds of equations, no one ever explained why you’d do a certain thing in a given step (e.g. Quadratic) even when I asked, repeatedly. The answer was always “you just do”. Well that doesn’t help with knowing when to apply a rule.

                And that was my experience with any math, right through college (3 universities). Most teachers suck, but holy shit math teachers are down right moronic. They can’t understand why students don’t get it. Well, try actually teaching something for a fucking change.

  • @kaffiene
    link
    English
    812 hours ago

    There’s a teacher with no sense of humour

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4112 hours ago

      There’s no teacher. Everything on that paper was most likely written by a single person.

      • qaz
        link
        English
        13 hours ago

        The ink does have a different color

      • Codex
        link
        25 hours ago

        All the "s"s do look very similar.

        Source: I am the world’s foremost forensic handwriting expert