You are not logged in.
I was bit busy with my studies so I didn't reply...
Yes ,bob it worked
Thanks again
Well after more search I found Nvidia 730M doesn't support four non gaming DirectX 11.1 features ,two of them are for 2D which I don't need in my 3D programming and other two seems to be not very useful for my 3D work.The plus point of nvidia is I get features like Optimus, PhysX, CUDA, 3D Vision, FXAA, TXAA, OpenCL, Direct Compute,and much more which could be explored in 3D programming...
So I am going for Nvidia ,I am not concluding AMD is bad but at this very moment the over all advantages is given by Nvidia
Thanks bobbym and Agnishom
I already saw that...
Thanks Agnishom and also thanks to bobbym for that information about CUDA
Thanks for the reply.
I think NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M score 2 points as its a bit better than AMD Radoen HD 8730M in performance and also it have drivers for linux which are better than ADM's drivers.
But I see AMD Radoen HD 8730M support full DirectX 11.1 in case of NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M it only support some features of DirectX 11.1,that's what making me thinking ,as for 3D development its better to have full DirectX 11.1,but again NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M have PhysX which is an another area I would like to explorer...
Any suggestions ....
Hi,
I am going to buy a laptop ,is Dell Inspiron any good ...
Two models are quite good for my needs Dell Inspiron 14R and Dell Inspiron 15R
what you guys think about it?
The two models differ in screen size and graphic cards ,the screen size doesn't matters much for me but the graphic card does,so I have two choices
1) NVIDIA GeForce GT730M 2GB VRAM
2) AMD Radoen HD 8730M 2GB VRAM
Both cards are almost similar,so I am confused what should I do...
Thanks
Sorry for the late reply...
Thanks Bob I will try it.
If
,prove thatI can't solve this part
Thanks
Thanks Bob for the reply
Well let me tell this first,I am not asking for any solution as I have them ,my problem is something different...
I can do trigonometric prove but only to a limit for example these kind of questions I have no problem
or more general types I have no problems ,but there are some I am having problems and I understand that, I am not understanding the process or steps involved in solving them for example
Question 1
Question 2
I am not able to solve these kind problems ,what I need to know is what steps you guys take to solve these kind of problems,actually I feel them very complex.
In short I do not need the solution for question 1 and 2 I need to know how you guys solve these.
Another thing ,my book have very few of these questions so I can't even practice more if you guys have any resource it would be great.
Thanks
@Mrwhy
I think the form factor is not 1,as its the case of a square wave,but in the image posted by the OP its not clear what is the time period of the pulse so we can't regard it as a square wave.
For a pulse wave form factor is
Good Luck
Well the image is not good enough to show any kind of electrical transient.But I guess its a pulse..
Any current which is not constant as in case of DC ,is reffer to as AC,even a pulse. In your image it looks like a DC transient.As AC is not constant they are measured differently than DC.In any circuit AC could be measured with Average,Peak-to-Peak,or RMS value.
Now the form factor is the ratio of RMS and Average value.
In your case I cant calculate as it needs more information about the wave,it needs the time period of the pulse.
Good Luck
Sorry I was in hurry its will be -n .I edited it on the first post too...
Here is the answer
The problem was it just got out of my mind about multiplicative inverse i.e..
Thanks
Ok I just got it
,my badSolved the problem
Find the sum of the following geometric series
I got an answer of
But the book gives an answer of
I think its a mistake ,it should be
Or am I wrong
Just want to be sure...
Thanks
@scientia I am sorry too, for being so rude
And sorry to everybody I could be a bit more polite...
@Agnishom, yes brother
And about the question, yes I have understood it ,its asking for the condition i.e.. a relation between the roots and the coefficients for which the roots will be in m:n ratio.
Is this the gratitude I get in return?
scientia ,if you can read English and understand it then look at post #4 ,I appreciated your work ,I thanked you...
Doing the sum is nothing its simple....
Maybe what you don't understand is not the question but the English language?
Yes, in general I speak English and understand it properly, but this question is not very much clear and I think bobbym also agreed with me on #7
My main question on post #1 was about clarification of the question elaborately ,I was not asking about the solution.
If somebody ask you --- What the question is asking for ? Find the roots of equation
.You knew what I asked for... but you yourself dont understand the question clearly, posting the solution doesnt means you know about it, their are many books where you will find this question and its solution.
Now the main thing, please please please please never ever try to help me again in future ,just stick with your bed and have good dreams...
I had also never seen this kind of stuff earlier...
Well in the book its done like this...
Find the condition that the roots of the equation
are in the ratioSolution :
Let
and be the two roots of the equationNow,
---Eq 1and
---Eq 2From Eq 1 we have ,
or ,
or ,
--- By Eq2or ,
which is the required condition
The values of the coefficients are in post #1
I have seen that...
I am just confused what the question is asking for...
In the book the process is a bit different but the required condition is given like scientia did
But still I am confused... I think I have to think about some more time...
Thanks
Ok I think you guys didn't understood what I was asking for...
I want to know what the question is asking for ,what condition ?
As bobbym showed I think the question is asking about the values of the coefficients which will make the roots of the equation in m:n ratio.Am I right ? if I am not please help me to understand
Thanks bobbym and scientia
Find the condition that the roots of the equation
are in the ratioMy problem is that I didnt understood this question i.e.. the language ,what condition its talking about... the two roots may be ma and na that will be in the ratio but what I have to show/do here.
Thanks:)
Well that solved the problem ,but still I have questions...
I understood that you used change base formula on LHS to change the base of
hi debjit625
so your expression (from post 8) becomes (all logs now in base 2):
(2log5)/2 + 1 = (2log5)/2 + log2
Bob
But what I didnt understood is that how you got it on RHS
As per me its like this
Thanks everybody it seems I have to learn a lot ,off course from you guys...
I need the next step ...
I am not sure how to prove LHS is equal to 1,shouldn't we only work with LHS and prove/show it is 1?
Thanks
Sorry I cant understand...
dividing both the sides by "log (base 10) 2" will give us
2log(base 4)5 + 1 = log (base 2) 10
Thanks
I am not sure how to do it ...still confused