The Proof is Trivial!

Original post by ukdragon37

Personally I like "ansatz". :tongue:

It's a great word. I learnt it in "The Quantum Story" :tongue:

Reply 1302

Original post by ukdragon37

Unfortunately that is incorrect, because the LOTF is very likely to be opposite but greater. :fyi:

For 'every' physicist, (the summation of all physicists) there is one Lord of the Flies who is equal to them. :wink:

Reply 1303

Original post by Zakee

For 'every' physicist, (the summation of all physicists) there is one Lord of the Flies who is equal to them. :wink:

Then you should have used some kind of proposition involving "all" rather than "every", and even then it's still probably greater. :nah:

Reply 1304

I wonder how physicsy I can make the questions before you all throw me out.... :tongue:

Reply 1305

Original post by ukdragon37

Then you should have used some kind of proposition involving "all" rather than "every", and even then it's still probably greater. :nah:

It wouldn't fit, you pernickety plop. :colonhash:

You're being ignominiously pedantic. Like that word? Take it! Do your dissertation. *prods*. :creep:

Reply 1306

Original post by bananarama2

I wonder how physicsy I can make the questions before you all throw me out.... :tongue:

I actually enjoy Mathematical Physics. I'm more of an applied Mathematician than anything (if I could even call myself a mathematician with the morsel that I know. :tongue:

)

Reply 1307

Original post by Zakee

You're being ignominiously pedantic. :creep:

Is that the right context for that word?

Reply 1308

Original post by Zakee

You're being ignominiously pedantic. :creep:

Is that the right context for that word?

I might walk ignominiously away from the thread after being shunned because the physics....

Reply 1309

Original post by bananarama2

Is that the right context for that word?

It can either be used for 'a shameful act'. Or 'something which deserves slander/calumny - a despicable act/one which can be reprimanded'. It is, as his views are reprehensible (those views being so pedantic). :argh:

Reply 1310

Original post by Zakee

It can either be used for 'a shameful act'. Or 'something which deserves slander/calumny - a despicable act/one which can be reprimanded'. It is, as his views are reprehensible (those views being so pedantic). :argh:

Fair enough, I'm not sure I'd use it like that if it were me.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 1311

Original post by bananarama2

Fair enough, I'm not sure I'd use it like that if it were me.

How would you use it? (See below).

Merriam-Webster
His crimes were ignominious; he had dropped a coin from the Eiffel tower and it had landed West of its original position.

Reply 1312

Original post by bananarama2

Is that the right context for that word?

I might walk ignominiously away from the thread after being shunned because the physics....

Original post by Zakee

How would you use it? (See below).

Merriam-Webster
His crimes were ignominious; he had dropped a coin from the Eiffel tower and it had landed West of its original position.

See above. I edited my post whilst you were typing :tongue:

Reply 1313

Original post by Zakee

(those views being so pedantic). :argh:

Welcome to TSR, we are more inclined to pedantry as a guilty pleasure than most :wink:

Reply 1314

shamika

16

Original post by ukdragon37

...

Mwahahaha I appear to have trained an army of talented mathmos to prod you to write your dissertation.

Spoiler

Reply 1315

Original post by shamika

Mwahahaha I appear to have trained an army of talented mathmos to prod you to write your dissertation.

Spoiler

And it's not working :wink:

Spoiler

Reply 1316

FireGarden

Quite an erroneous post!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 1317

Original post by FireGarden

Disproof 39

The proposition:

p(x)+p'''(x)\geq p'(x)+p''(x),\ \forall x \implies p(x)\geq 0 \ \forall x

It's contrapositive:

p(x) < 0 \ \forall x \implies p(x)+p'''(x) < p'(x)+p''(x),\ \forall x

Are you sure that's the contrapositive?

Spoiler

REPOSTED: Darn TSR not working.

Reply 1318

FireGarden

edit: yeah, don't worry.. being a moron..

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 1319