You are not logged in.
Do you like Bertrand Russell too? I like his paradox very much! hehe...
Hey, I know how to solve it now, too!
The keys are
a) the derivative of cos²(x) is -2cos(x)sin(x)
b)
Your question is so inspiring! I used to think this kinda trig and derivative mix is my last-to-solve.
Do you need to master special solutions to all types of DEs? Frankly, I find solving a DE manually is not a good idea.
for PDEs, I think there are virtually no manual solutions. We have to count on computing softwares.
It's really great to have someone knowing how to solve hard integrals to join!
even bio major need to know DE now...... IT CAN'T BE HAPPENING!!
2x(x+7)-x(x+3) = x²-1
x(2x+14-x-3)=x²-1
11x=-1
x=-1/11
Yes, but a trick will solve the controversy
devide the original curve or function into such pieces that in each piece x and y are one by one, use my procedure seperately and then stick the pieces by original sequence.
I've written the proof or the derivation in post 3, following Ricky's fomula, so you can check my procedure and simply duplicate it before showing the formula. And that will make your solution complete.
Your teacher may have challenged you TOO MUCH!!
i am poor in algebra, too
Compare y=f(ax[sub]2[/sub]) and y=f(x)
when the two y equals, usually the value in the bracket equals.
ax[sub]2[/sub]=x
thus x[sub]2[/sub]=x/a
z=0, 0<x<2, 0<y<4
z=5, 0<x<2, 0<y<4
......
CDF(median)=1/2
CDF(lower quatile)=1/4
CDF(upper quatile)=3/4
-you can solve the three using the expression of CDF yourself now:D
Ricky, I guess you've misunderstood him.
Yeah, your proof is restricted to the base nonnegative, while the proof by binomial expension is restricted to exponent natural numbers.
You've got a wrong problem
Total probability (integral of PDF from -4 to 4) is infinite because ln0=-∞ .
That contradicts the rule that total probability is 1.
It depends on whether y is defined as nonnegtive or nonpositive. In either case, you can solve y explicitly and substitude y with the expression in the solution, and get a global solution on a certain domain.
Or, you already know the point (x[sub]0[/sub],y[sub]0[/sub]), and you want to find the tangent slope at it, you will easily get a local solution.
By the way,
d(a[sup]k[/sup])/dk = k a[sup]k-1[/sup]
should that be
?(sin^2(2x))^2-That's just one way.
[sin²(2x)²]'=2sin²(2x) [sin²(2x)]'=2sin²(2x) 2sin(2x)[sin(2x)]'
=4sin³(2x)cos(2x)[2x]'=4sin³(2x)cos(2x)2=8sin³(2x)cos(2x)
you just need to factor m and n into products of prime numbers.
m= p[sub]1[/sub][sup]i1[/sup] p[sub]2[/sub][sup]i2[/sup]... p[sub]l[/sub][sup]il[/sup]
n= q[sub]1[/sub][sup]j1[/sup] q[sub]2[/sub][sup]j2[/sup] ... q[sub]k[/sub][sup]jk[/sup]
m²=...
n²= ...
compare the two sets above, latter will contain former.and then take square roots
How hard? exploring radioactiveness? Using quatum theory? or discovering Nanotech?
Luck ain't even lucky
Got to make your own breaks
Okay, I agree since countable sets are such defined.
I have both bad news and good news for you.
bad news is-your theorem has already exist. in differential equation field, there is a similar formula called Euler's Method to evaluate f(x+a), given f'(x+t) 0<t<a and f(x).
Still Congratulations! You have your Own Thought and Creativity.
Keep this thinking habit and Eventually you'll break a point in some field!
The only thing I deny is my denial.
But serious, what are you talking about George?
the point and assumption you use is that since before 2,2,2.... there are infinite numbers (or elements) of 1, 2 can not exist in the set.
By same argument, I would say 2 in R set cannot have the chance to appear, for there are perhaps even more numbers ahead of it, and most of all you cannot find the number exactly ahead of 2.