The h Bar

That is the usual way of defining mass as the curvature of the dispersion relation. Do notice, however, that this dispersion relation is with respect to PSEUDO-momentum...

Bernardo Meurer

pointer to a pointer to a pointer

G. Bergeron

No Galilean invariance is broken on the whole system.

Bernardo Meurer

this is getting tricky

Yashas

@BernardoMeurer why do you need a triple pointer?

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer We're not the ones devising that :p

@Yashas dereference

Bernardo Meurer

1:14 AM

@Yashas I have the following:

    int game_sz = 5, level = 1, score = 0, difficulty = 10;
    int **board = (int **) (calloc((size_t) (game_sz), sizeof(int *)));
    for (int i = 0; i < game_sz; ++i) board[i] = (int *) calloc((size_t) (game_sz), sizeof(int));
    board[0][0] = 1;

I need to pass it as a reference to a function

How to do that except with a triple pointer?

Yashas

I think you can't

Bernardo Meurer

Yeah, but I'm getting a weird error now

So that goes into a function

and this function must now call another function that needs to also take this by reference

Meh, I'll just push to GH

You will see

One moment

@Yashas Go look at the master branch, function boardMove and then it's call to boardGetCol

Line 457 is the issue currently

G. Bergeron

@Slereah You will not see NEC violations like that (I highly doubt it), in condensed matter systems, you always have effective ''everything'' from which you get exotic statistics, negative mass, ''superluminal'' propagation, quantum numbers separation and fractionalization, etc.

@Slereah But the whole system does not exhibit any of that. I guess it really depends on what the word '' vacuum'' means to you.

Bernardo Meurer

@Yashas Any clue on how to fix this?

Slereah

Well violation of NEC is usually considered as ~ energy under the vacuum expectation value

of course it depends on the cosmological constant

Yashas

1:19 AM

Using triple pointers is a bad practice. You could wrap the board in a struct for pointer sake. @BernardoMeurer

G. Bergeron

@Slereah Yes, but the vacuum of what?

Bernardo Meurer

@Yashas No structs allowed

That's why I'm doing this nasty BS

Yashas

@BernardoMeurer typedef int** _Board

Bernardo Meurer

@Yashas Not allowed dude

G. Bergeron

@Slereah It's not the issue of the cosmological constant, it's the question of what is a vacuum point. If you take it to be empty spacetime, then decomposing all those complex systems as excitations of this vacuum will not lead to violation of NEC

Bernardo Meurer

1:21 AM

I can't typedef or struct

I already had to fight to get that color typedef to pass

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer Then no function and do it all in main ! :)

Bernardo Meurer

@G.Bergeron Almost, this prof is a chump

Yashas

@BernardoMeurer You can create an interface to work with boards: wrap the dirty stuff in a function.

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer No spaghettis !

Bernardo Meurer

@Yashas I can, yes, but right now I just need that one thing to work so I can sleep

Yashas

1:23 AM

@BernardoMeurer `int **board = (int **) (calloc((size_t) (game_sz), sizeof(int *)));
for (int i = 0; i < game_sz; ++i) board[i] = (int *) calloc((size_t) (game_sz), sizeof(int));
board[0][0] = 1;`

You could allocate all the memory together.

Bernardo Meurer

I'm in an island in the middle of the Atlantic solving this bs

Yashas

now you can pass a single or double pointer

but write wrappers to work with it

G. Bergeron

@Slereah But then if you take the vacuum point to be the ground state of some composite system where you omit some parts, then yes, it can happen

Bernardo Meurer

@Yashas I know that, I had that before, I just want to understand how to work with the triple pointer

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer And? I'm on a big island surrounded by water, doing ...

Bernardo Meurer

1:24 AM

@G.Bergeron I was supposed to be on vacation

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer Remind me what that word mean?

Bernardo Meurer

@G.Bergeron I'm literally in a little island in the middle of nowhere

Slereah

@G.Bergeron I'll trust you on that!

Not very good on condensed matter

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer How come you are in vacation in the middle of term?

Bernardo Meurer

goo.gl/maps/TX7xMaGDv1D2

@G.Bergeron Easter is a week-long holiday here

This is where I am

G. Bergeron

1:27 AM

@Slereah Not exactly my specialty either, but I get pissed when pop-sci articles reinvent physics every months

nouveau is not used on my office computer for browsers... :(

@BernardoMeurer ^ that was for you

Slereah

I stopped reading pop science a while ago

not overly interesting for my specialty most of the time :p

G. Bergeron

@Slereah What specialty would be ?

Yashas

@BernardoMeurer difranco.net/compsci/C_Operator_Precedence_Table.htm

@BernardoMeurer [] gets done before *

You need to do use (*triple_ptr)[row][col]

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer Try looking for Atlantis !

Slereah

I'm mostly a GR fellow

G. Bergeron

1:29 AM

Should be not too far

Slereah

outside of gravitational wave and the odd article on the Alcubierre metric, it's mostly out of the news

G. Bergeron

@Slereah Ah ok, what I meant is no specialist will be reading pop-sci

Hello @Yashas

hi @Ramanujan

@Yashas Of course!

1:30 AM

well you know, it can be nice knowing what's in the news

Bernardo Meurer

Second time today I do this lol

Slereah

but eh

G. Bergeron

@Slereah yeah well the waves were a hit

@Slereah arxiv

Slereah

The funniest article I read about gravitational waves was on Al Jazeera

The comments were all about Israel and Palestine

G. Bergeron

@Slereah hmm...

@BernardoMeurer So, can I say you should have finished it before :p

Ramanujan

1:31 AM

SDimensional formula for length(l)in a system of units in which the fundamental units are Force(F), acceleration(A) and time(T) is

@yashas

Bernardo Meurer

@G.Bergeron I did :)

And then my project got rejected

on basis of being "too complex"

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer So you didn't :)

Bernardo Meurer

:/

Yashas

@Ramanujan $[F^\alpha][A^\beta][T^\gamma] = [L]$, solve for alpha, beta and gamma

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer He should have said uncomputable with respect to available resources 8D

Cows

1:33 AM

So is the Atiya index theory just really, about number of solutions is related to something about topology

for diff eqq

Bernardo Meurer

@G.Bergeron he meant my implementation was too complex

I needed to use simpler things

G. Bergeron

@Cows dim of kernel - dim of co-kernel

Bernardo Meurer

god knows hwy

G. Bergeron

@BernardoMeurer maybe because it was too complex

Ramanujan

How to solve further? @yashas

Bernardo Meurer

1:34 AM

@G.Bergeron He's a lazy ass prof

Yashas

@Ramanujan You haven't solved problems like these before? Write down the dimensions of F, A, T in the S.I. system.

Ramanujan

II have solved!before @yashas

Cows

@G.Bergeron yup analytical index
(P) := dim ker(P) – dim coker(P) ; and topological index(P) := (-1)
n
< ch (s(P)) . td (T
C
X) , [X] >

yeah I think it makes sense now

@G.Bergeron what escapes me is why it is super important in physics. I know it helps in knowing if the solutions exist and how many there are

G. Bergeron

@Cows because of symplectic geometry

Ramanujan

@yashas i got the answer as F^0A^1T^2

G. Bergeron

1:39 AM

For instance, you want to know how many different symplectic forms can exist on a manifold

Yashas

@Ramanujan Well, you got the answer. The dimensions of L in that system is $[F^0 A^1 T^2]$

Cows

@G.Bergeron Ok so far I know some symplectic geometry poisson brackets and commutation relations and so forth. I know some atiyah index stuff. Where do they marry?

G. Bergeron

@Cows The index can help classify different 2-manifold embedding, when seen as cycles in H_2

Cows

@G.Bergeron I see. awesome!

G. Bergeron

And since the symplectic form is Poincaré dual to that, you get a classification for the forms

Ramanujan

1:43 AM

The dimensions for $\dfrac {1}{\sqrt {u_0 E_0}}$ are same as:

1. Acceleration

2. Velocity

3. Time

4. Energy

@yashas

Yashas

what is u and E?

Ramanujan

physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2016/01/… @yashas try to see at last pic.

Yashas

that equation gives the speed of light

therefore, the dimensions of that quantity is [LT^-1]

G. Bergeron

@Cows As for solutions of diff. equations, if generated by an Hamiltonian, they are invariant symplectic submanifolds that foliates the space and can thus be classified with their index.

Ramanujan

Then it is same as velocity @yashas

dmckee

1:46 AM

@Ramanujan The symbols there ahould $\mu_0$ (\mu_0) and $\epsilon_0$ (\epsilon_0).

Cows

@G.Bergeron wow

Ramanujan

What is magmetic moment? @yashas

Yashas

@Ramanujan [U] = [mB] where m is magnetic moment

dmckee

@BernardoMeurer 9 out of 10 time having three levels of indirection means either you've designed it wrong or aren't isolating some part of your system sufficiently.

G. Bergeron

@Cows But yeah, symplectic geometry goes far beyond. What I am trying to get now is how the contravariant (deformation of functions on the manifolds) and covariant (deformation of the homological cup-product) ways of obtaining quantum mechanics match.

Ramanujan

1:50 AM

And U and B??@Yashas

Yashas

@Ramanujan Potential energy and magnetic field

Cows

@G.Bergeron I had no idea how deep such ideas were.

G. Bergeron

@Cows We're all really just getting occupied waiting for a planck mass accelerator :P

Cows

@G.Bergeron hehe :D

G. Bergeron

Anyway, I'm hungry and need to get home!

See you all

Bernardo Meurer

1:54 AM

@dmckee The latter

Cows

@G.Bergeron see you next time. I enjoyed the conversation, and learned a lot.

NyxTheShield

2:35 AM

Hey , is there anybody around?

I am kinda lost trying to figure out the electric field of a certain geometryc figure

Is there anyone thats good with elegtromagnetism haha?

0celouvsky

2:48 AM

@DanielSank Why?

loltospoon

3:22 AM

Hi

Hi all*

vzn

3:40 AM

@G.Bergeron interesting! do you have interest or bkg in analog computing? yeah its amazing how much theres been a paradigm shift toward energy consumption vs raw performance in hardware design last few years. would defn make a great topic for a speaker session :) ps have you heard about googles building tensorflow cpu last few years? new info causing big waves! extremetech.com/computing/…

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Ask.

vzn

@BernardoMeurer cf smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-02-17

NyxTheShield

@blue

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield hey, go ahead !

0celouvsky

@BalarkaSen I have a VB $E\to X$. Let $T'X$ be $T^*X$ minus the zero section. We have a projection $\pi:T'X\to X$. What is $\pi^*E$ supposed to be?

NyxTheShield

3:48 AM

I am trying to find the magnetic field of an sphere of ratius R1 that has 2 vid sized sphered of ratius R0, symetrically placed from the center at a distance A

let me draw it

(the magnetic field in any point in space)

Anonymous

"vid sized sphered of ratius R0"

Anonymous

Oo

Anonymous

What does that mean?

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Yes, draw it and upload

NyxTheShield

*Void

sorry, missed the O

basically, a n sphere with 2 sphere sized holes

Sir Cumference

3:52 AM

Anyone from the UK here?

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield You want to know the magnetic field or electric field?

0celouvsky

@BalarkaSen Hmm. Is it the pullback bundle over $T'X$, where we pull back along the projection $T'X\to X$? I need assistance understanding this thing

Anonymous

1 hour ago, by NyxTheShield

I am kinda lost trying to figure out the electric field of a certain geometryc figure

NyxTheShield

Electric Field, sorry

scontent.fscl6-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t34.0-12/…

There are 2 charges of magnitude Q in the center of the voids

Anonymous

It is easy. Superpose two negatively charged spheres on the positive charged sphere (exactly at the location where the cavities were). If you know the formula for the electric field due to a charged sphere at a distance $r$ then just add them up vectorially for all the three (one real and two imaginary spheres).

NyxTheShield

3:59 AM

Thats, the elctric field in a point outside the sphere, right?

(also, a non conductive sphere, right?)

Anonymous

Yes. (For the imaginary negative spheres)

vzn

@Kaumudi.H fyi in case you didnt notice there was some recommendation of you as a AMA speaker for the site. would like to 2nd encourage/ invite you. physics, JEE, india, fiction, am sure the hour would go by fast, plz think it over, let me know of any questions, no more effort reqd than you already make but ofc anything addl is welcome, and anyway thx for continuing to share your unique pov here :) physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7783/…

NyxTheShield

Also, for imaginary

do you mean like I suppose there is a full sphere on there?

basically the Gauss surface that covers the field inside the void?

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Yes. A negatively charged sphere (with the exact charge density as the original positively charged sphere).

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Don't bring in Gauss law here. We don't need it here.

NyxTheShield

4:04 AM

We are using gauss to calculate the field right now

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield You could. But not necessary. If you know the electric field due to a sphere.

NyxTheShield

Since the voids are not symetrical, wouldnt be their electric field translated as well?

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Doesn't matter. Electric field can be added vectorially.

NyxTheShield

In X Y Z, yeah I could do it easily, I dumbed down this problem with a constant electric field but in a test the electric field is gonna be a weird function that deppends from x,y,z coordinates so I will need to integrate with a spherical coordinate change

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield Yeah, you might need to integrate. But the concept remains the same.

NyxTheShield

4:08 AM

Okay, I got the outside field well then. My problem lies in the interior of the sphere and in the voids

I am not entirely sure about the field in those coordinates

Anonymous

What problem?

user228700

@vzn Hey :-) "Thanks for continuing to share your unique pov here" That's a very kind thing to say, thank you. I'd love to but I dunno if anybody here would be interested in that. Do you know of at least five who would? :-P

NyxTheShield

I dont know how to exactly calculate the field inside the sphere

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Me.

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield You only need field outside a sphere

Anonymous

4:10 AM

Use Gauss law if you wish

Anonymous

@Yashas Yoho

user228700

That's one! :-)

NyxTheShield

Not in my tests, we are asked to calculate the field in any point in the space, including voids and solid materials

:c

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield So use gauss law

Anonymous

What's the big deal?

NyxTheShield

4:11 AM

Thats my problem, I dont know to propose it

the double void confuses me

Anonymous

Oh my goodness! Treat them as spheres and just add up the fields vectorially.

Anonymous

Use gauss law for each individual sphere

NyxTheShield

Then I just add their net charge and divide it by the gauss surface of a sphere of the big radius? that should do it?

Anonymous

@NyxTheShield No. You add their net electric field.

user228700

@blue Have you considered that some of them might not be passionate about Science in the first place?

Anonymous

4:20 AM

@Kaumudi.H I feel habits that are garnered from one field of study helps to build up a person as a whole. It don't believe that a person who deeply thinks about literature won't deeply think about Science. Deep thinking is a "habit" which doesn't restrict itself to one field only. That has been my experience.

Anonymous

I've seen great scientists who have been passionate about literature as well as great literary artists who deeply reflect upon scientific facts/results. I've never seen a great scientist who hates literature or a great literary artist who hates science. At least not till now.

user228700

@blue That's true; the skill of critical thinking will be applied by the brain of the person in question in all the other facets of that person's life but I am asking if you have considered whether or not they don't like Science in the first place so they don't spend time to educate themselves in that area.

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Yes, they neither like science nor literature. Mostly they read for just entertainment and time pass. Reading can become an addiction and they fall into the trap of "lazy habit of reading too much and thinking too less".

user228700

I haven't met very many people for whom reading mindlessly has become an addiction so I can't comment.

user228700

Heck, I haven't met anybody like that.

Anonymous

4:29 AM

@Kaumudi.H Maybe you need to observe them closely. If you see them spending hours reading harry potter or some novel and then mugging up for exams the evening before, then probably they belong to that category.

user228700

They may not be interested in Science!

Joshua Lin

@blue sounds like me

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Then they are not even interested in literature! They read it just for entertainment. (That's my pov)

user228700

What the heck? Do u really believe that those not interested in Science aren't interested in literature?

user228700

Another extremely important point to consider is that some of these people who you claim "mug up the formulae" may not possess adequate resources to help them to understand the subject at a deeper level.

Anonymous

4:31 AM

@Kaumudi.H Interested for entertainment? Yes. Interested for developing mental maturity or critical thinking? No.

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Nobody possesses the resources. Everyone works hard to gather them. (Unless you are so poor that you can't afford education...that's another issue....)

Joshua Lin

not sure what's going on but I spent half my life at some point reading harry potter over and over

user228700

Unless they are already interested in Science, they aren't going to go looking for resources.

Joshua Lin

somehow my brain still feels ok though

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Great. Do you feel that you could have spent that time doing something more productive, given a chance to go back in time? Or no?

Joshua Lin

4:34 AM

what is 'productive'? in what sense is it productive?

user228700

I have known many people who have been humiliated for not immediately understanding Math/Science by their teachers and friends.

Joshua Lin

ive always thought that time spent having fun is time spent productively

dunno how else you will measure your life's worth

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin I mean would you have done something else that would have enjoyed more today?

Joshua Lin

it's true that I would probably not enjoy reading harry potter again, but at the time I did enjoy reading harry potter, so its fine that I read harry potter then because I was happy at least for those ~5 years or so

actually thats a lie I'd probably enjoy reading harry potter now too

i just have other things i enjoy doing now apart from reading harry potter

user228700

Not everybody has an immediate affinity for Science but this doesn't directly point to an inherent lack of motivation to think critically; they may never had any encouragement to pursue Science in the first place.

Anonymous

4:36 AM

@Kaumudi.H There is a difference between not understanding and not trying to understand.

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H I need some examples of people who think critically about literature and not about other things they study, like Science/Maths. Yet to come across one.

Joshua Lin

why do you need those examples? I had a shakespeare proffesor who never thought about maths does that count

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin That is totally possible. I'm not sure such people have great perceptions about life.

user228700

One cannot expect them to continue trying after having been humiliated for not understanding in the first place. 99% of the teachers I've had gave up on us far too quickly; I have come as far as I have (which is nowhere, really, but certainly not nothing compared to where I was before) only because I did have a keen interest for learning Science.

Joshua Lin

whats even going on here
whats a 'great perception about life'? greatness?

user228700

4:40 AM

Many of my friends didn't have that interest and were greatly discouraged so they gave up; that doesn't speak about their perceptions of life or anything! It's perfectly plausible to have an excellent perception of life and not think about Science or Math a single day.

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Will power is certainly one of those things which one can learn from fiction. If they gave up I doubt how much they learnt from the novels they read and critically think about.

user228700

They weren't interested to learn Science!

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Then I claim that they weren't interested in learning from the novels either. They were reading them for fun/addiction.

user228700

@blue: Geez, do you really believe that everybody who doesn't care about Science cares about nothing else?

Joshua Lin

you don't learn willpower from fiction lol
you learn the art of writing; the art of reading; the art of observing; the art of feeling from fiction
nothing like willpower comes from fiction i think

Anonymous

4:43 AM

@JoshuaLin I don't agree.

Joshua Lin

why

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H I believe all the fields of study go hand in hand with literature. Especially science and mathematics (being the purest form of logic). So it is not possible to love one and hate the other.

Joshua Lin

how is mathematics the purest form of logic

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin We could go into that debate some other day.

Anonymous

Got to go soon

Anonymous

4:45 AM

@Kaumudi.H So what what?

Joshua Lin

hmm yeah I do think all legends I know like both literature and math

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Me too.

user228700

@blue: Patronising as this sounds, I hope you meet people who challenge this extremely prejudiced perception of yours. It's perfectly possible to not be interested in one subject simply because they haven't been exposed to it in the first place.

Joshua Lin

don't think that implies you have to like both though

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Haven't come across any great scientist who hates literature.

Anonymous

4:47 AM

And vice versa.

NyxTheShield

That moment when you cant integrate a translated sphere hahahahaha

user228700

I agree that those who think critically about literature should also be able to think about Science in the same way but most people simply haven't been exposed to the beauty of Science.

Joshua Lin

well im not sure I would say that any famous authors I know actually knows 'math'

like actual math

well I don't even know what math is anyway so I guess that statement was pretty vacuous

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Does any great author hate maths?

Anonymous

Not being exposed is a different issue.

Joshua Lin

4:48 AM

thats not a very well defined question of no great author even knows what math is right

if none have been exposed; then its kind of pointless to talk about whether they like it or not

and the only exposure you get to 'real math' whatever that means is by actually studying it at least at the graduate level

user228700

There are many many people in my life who are able to marvel at Science when I explain something to them and we are even able to have excellent conversations about the same but they have suffered in the hands of discouraging teachers and pretentious friends so they didn't feel like taking it up on their own.

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin I wonder how many of them would not attend a maths seminar given a chance (and consider maths as useless, boring).

Anonymous

We need more evidence I think.

Joshua Lin

many? considering that that they probably would just sit there and not understand any of the words

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin A basic maths seminar.

Joshua Lin

4:50 AM

even at the undergrad level if you go to math seminars you don't understand any of the words
whats the chance an author with no math training would understand things in a math seminar

Anonymous

Which is directed towards the layman

Joshua Lin

well then its not really a math seminar; thats my point
'actual math' is different from 'layman math' in a very different way

unless you have some sort of definition for math that unifies the two
but then math sort of gets dilated and encompasses like everything

user228700

@blue: I hope you're able to stop thinking that your perception of the world is somehow greater than those of people who don't think about Science everyday; I am arguing for those people who can and absolutely will engage in conversations about Science if explained to them.

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H I never claimed my perception is better.

user228700

Oh, you certainly did.

Anonymous

4:52 AM

No.

user228700

Oh, read the transcript; that is exactly what is implied by everything you've said, even if you didn't mean it.

Joshua Lin

? simply arguing about a topic means that you think your view is better than others isnt it

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Math is math. Be it layman's math or advanced math. I don't get your point.

Joshua Lin

unless you are both arguing for no reason

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin No. This is a debate. Not an argument.

Joshua Lin

4:54 AM

whats the difference

also actual math is definitely different from laymans math

user228700

I understand the point you've been trying to make; that people who think critically about literature should be able to do the same with Science but I have been arguing for those people who have been discouraged to learn Science early-on in their education by teachers who couldn't care less.

Joshua Lin

you dont get actually deep things in layman math

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin So what? Layman's math is also "maths".

Joshua Lin

what are you defining as maths

the manipulation of symbols or something? thats a pretty bad definition

Anonymous

Definitions of mathematics

Mathematics has no generally accepted definition. Different schools of thought, particularly in philosophy, have put forth radically different definitions. All are controversial. == Survey of leading definitions == === Early definitions === Aristotle defined mathematics as: The science of quantity. In Aristotle's classification of the sciences, discrete quantities were studied by arithmetic, continuous quantities by geometry. Auguste Comte's definition tried to explain the role of mathematics in coordinating phenomena in all other fields: The science of indirect measurement. Auguste Comte 1851...

Joshua Lin

4:56 AM

if you define math to encompass layman math then you are probably dilating the field of math way too much

literally the first sentence of that article is "mathematics has no generally accepted definition"?

i dont even need to open it

wow this is refreshing having an argument online

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin Well, that's how I define it.

Joshua Lin

no accepted definition?

user228700

And they will listen to you if you explain it to them but they won't try to learn on their own because they don't understand it and find it far too difficult and feel that their time could be spent elsewhere.

Joshua Lin

so literally everything youve said has no meaning since you have no definition for math?

user228700

@blue: And it is not OK to deem their perceptions of life as any lesser than a person who does read Science.

Anonymous

4:57 AM

@JoshuaLin My definition includes layman maths

Anonymous

Like addition subtraction and stuff

Joshua Lin

that doesnt say what your definition is

Anonymous

@JoshuaLin It will be a one page definition.

Joshua Lin

you think addition is math?

Anonymous

Yes

Joshua Lin

4:58 AM

ok

user228700

Also, @JohnR: Morning :-)

Anonymous

@Kaumudi.H Isn't that what my point is? If they are passionate about literature they will be passionate (or alteast try to be) about learning maths too, when they are being explained "they will listen to you if you explain it to them"

Transcript for