« first day (3982 days earlier)      last day (75 days later) » 

6:39 AM
can anyone help me in understanding why the roots of linear differential equation or the solution of the nth order differential equation come in the form of y=cnenx+cn−1en−1x...=0? $y=c_ne^nx+c_n-1e^{n-1}x...=0$
 
 
1 hour later…
7:49 AM
here is a message
===
one more
Here is a message
 
one more
 
and this
 
8:47 AM
@JackRod What you wrote is utter nonsense. And from your comments in the other chat-room it is clear that you are not ready to understand even basic real analysis, much less differential equations. As I told you before in this very room, I'm not interested in teaching if you're not interested in learning properly.
 
8:57 AM
@user21820 Yes I am
 
9:26 AM
You are not, and the last few times you asked me a question you completely ignored what I tried to teach you.
 
 
1 hour later…
10:45 AM
@user21820 there was no non-sense in my question i asked what I believe i have confusion in it
 
5 messages moved from Basic Mathematics
@JackRod Just look at what you wrote. It's of the form "y = ... = 0".
That's just pure nonsense, and not to say the "e^{n-1}x" part of your LaTeX formula is completely bogus.
 
@user21820 may be my latex could be wrong
but for the one you mentioned above was wrong and I got correct it in the next few sentences
 
Rubbish; it's not just the LaTeX that is wrong; you're not even reading what you wrote.
You didn't get anything correct in the room you posted it in, so if you want to do slipshod work then do it in this room and get it right before posting elsewhere.
 
ok
and how do I know when it is ready to be posted in that room?
 
11:12 AM
@user21820 when will u teach me
how should I prove that yes i am ready to work AQ to you?
@user21820 please!!!
 
11:43 AM
@JackRod I'll teach you if you're willing to learn whatever I feel is best for you, and not what you want me to tell you. Especially not before exams.
 
ok
 
@JackRod But I don't know what "AQ" means so I can't answer that.
 
According to U
I used "AQ" when I am referring According to u
 
I see. Ok.
 
as you mentioned I lacked basic real analysis
my prof is been teaching real analysis to us
 
11:45 AM
Yes, that's the biggest problem right now.
 
So I am happy to learn it
but how we gonna do that?
in what way i feel
 
What is your current background? High-school mathematics?
 
I am high school passed out
I am a physics major
 
Hmm.
Did you learn "a^(b·c) = (a^b)^c"?
 
so currently we have been doing two topics simultaneously that is numerical analysis
and real analysis
no
 
11:53 AM
Wait...
That's supposed to be high-school stuff.
@JackRod And before you continue with the wrong impression, by "real analysis" I mean "rigorous real analysis".
 
ok
 
Are you sure you did not learn "a^(b·c) = (a^b)^c" in high-school?
 
is it related Chinese remainder theorem
@user21820
or similar to that
I remember last time we were discussing the same question
 
@JackRod No I just picked a random thing that high-school students are all supposed to know.
If you haven't even seen it before, then you're really not at high-school standard.
 
12:08 PM
you have given no information about what a,b,c are?
 
@JackRod That's true. Can you state a correct version?
 
a,b,c are natural number
i feel?
 
Sorry, but mathematics is not about feeling. You either know something completely or you don't know it at all.
 
@user21820
 
Take a look at this website and tell me all the errors in that table called "Rules/Laws of Exponents".
 
12:15 PM
you can give me five minutes actually my dog has just kicked my coffee mug
only five minutes
 
Just ping me when you're done. Remember that saying "I don't know" is better than saying something wrong.
 
ok
@user21820 I feel it is mostly correct
I have not seen it rigorously but it is looking good
 
It's mostly wrong, and you're inconsistent. Earlier on when I wrote exactly the same thing as one of the rows you said "you have given no information about what a,b,c are?". But when I show you the website you fail to make the same objection.
 
if u see the eg they are all integers
exception of vairables
 
@JackRod Examples do not mean anything.
 
12:22 PM
so I have not asked what a,b,c are?
 
The point is that you were wrong. The table did not specify what x,y,z are, so every single row in that table is wrong.
If you think you can correct that table, then do it.
 
Is it a test?
@user21820 can I prove them wrong using counter example
 
@JackRod Show me, and also state corrected versions.
 
in the first example
of the row
 
??? If you want to say something, write a complete sentence before posting. This is the kind of slipshod work I don't want to see, as you're wasting my time in waiting for you to finish what you want to say.
 
12:32 PM
any number x and any integers a and b, (x^a)(x^b)=x^a+b

To multiply exponential terms with the same base, add the exponents.

When we are reading mathematical rules, we have to becautious . For example, when using the product rule, you may only apply it when the terms being multiplied have the same base and the exponents are integers. Conditions on mathematical rules are often given before the rule is stated, as in this example it says “For any number x, and any integers a and b.”
 
@JackRod Your first line is completely wrong, and I even tried explaining to you before but you completely ignored me:
in Basic Mathematics, Dec 20 '19 at 14:20, by user21820
@YuvrajSingh... You copy what I wrote, but you did not even apply it to what you wrote. As I said earlier, you repeatedly make the same mistakes over and over again, not because you cannot fix them but because you don't learn from them.
in Basic Mathematics, Dec 12 '19 at 7:35, by user21820
In each row I list the operations of the same precedence between {}, and specify ltr (left-to-right) or rtl (right-to-left). The higher row has higher precedence.
in Basic Mathematics, Dec 20 '19 at 14:25, by user21820
There is zero point going on if you cannot get basic arithmetic correct. And that includes getting the precedence rules correct. So I won't respond until you actually put in the effort to learn what you were supposed to.
 
@user21820 ???????
@user21820 but what is wrong?
 
12:56 PM
@JackRod It's all explained in the linked messages. Click on them and read what I told you nearly 2 years ago, which you ignored.
 
 
3 hours later…
3:33 PM
italic
CamelCase
WORKDdsWEFRWEfweyes yes
italic sub italic
*italic ** bold sub italic ***
w ut
yes
yes yes  yess      yes
 

« first day (3982 days earlier)      last day (75 days later) »