« first day (1540 days earlier)      last day (3480 days later) » 

8:00 PM
@robjohn I assumed you were a memory god !
 
@robjohn I don't use them often either ...
 
@Balarka!
 
@DanielFischer
 
tommy once told me the beta function is usefull... but i dont remember why
 
Ouch.
 
8:01 PM
@BalarkaSen hi
I got kicked from chat yesterday ... ( angry )
 
@mick why?
 
just because i used the f-word or such , though I used stars .... I find it lame that when using stars you can still get kicked ...
There was no fight either ... lame
maybe someone took it to serious and personal ... i dont know who kicked me
 
@robjohn I think that integral is very nice for a book. I also work on a second approach completely elementary.
 
i have no history of either getting banned from chat or using swear words, fortunately.
@Studentmath hello
 
@Balarka it's too late now
 
8:08 PM
@BalarkaSen Im not so civilized as you :)
then again i have seen others do it , and they did not get kicked ... which annoys me.
 
@Studentmath I was doing topology, in my defence. :P
 
@BalarkaSen defense ?
 
@mick Don't talk like others do. Study like them.
@mick I use c instead of s in defence. It's customary, somewhat.
 
@robjohn I might be proposed for a contest like Putnam (especially for the fact that it offers the possibility to finish it without using special functions, and no need for series).
 
typo
 
8:10 PM
@robjohn I've always thought that the analytic continuation of the beta function using the Pochhammer contour was pretty cool (even though it admittedly took me a while to understand it).
 
@mick no, it's not. this
it's american spelling, I trust. no idea. but it is correct.
 
right , i remember reading " sicilian defense " in the books.
 
Defence is fine. British/Austrillian/.... English uses that.
Usually
 
chessbooks as you probably know.
 
And Toplogy is a good defen(c)(s)e
 
8:13 PM
@Studentmath Thanks for the back up ;)
"I am sorry..."

"No need to topologize"
@RandomVariable Indeed. It was mind blowing.
 
conversations are Always weird here ..
@ccorn what function is that ?
 
Nice pun
 
Anyone interested in this problem?
 
Anyone in the mood to answer my lastest question on main ?
 
@BalarkaSen I thought it was interesting well before I even understood it. I guess I'm easily impressed.
 
8:16 PM
Did not realise Defence and Defense were spelled differently
 
@Studentmath Martin Gardner
@RandomVariable Well it was an exotic contour, no doubt.
 
@BalarkaSen i believe he is dead.
 
@Chris'ssis: I have added a few sections to my answer which clarify the later parts of the paper i wrote about 5 years ago.
 
@RandomVariable what is your expected value?
 
$$f(x,y) = \frac{|x|^s|y|^{2s}}{x^2+y^2}, what is the smallest s to make f(x,y) continuous at (0,0)?
oops sorry
$$f(x,y) = \frac{|x|^s|y|^{2s}}{x^2+y^2}$$, what is the smallest s to make f(x,y) continuous at (0,0)?
 
8:18 PM
@mick What are you referring to?
 
@robjohn did you just loose 3k reputation or is something wrong with my computer or eyes ??? confused ...
 
@Alizter I don't have one. I follow a Cauchy distribution.
 
@ccorn your pic
avatar
 
@mick some modular function
probably eta
 
@mick Let me check.
 
8:20 PM
@BalarkaSen yes that was clear , but which one was what i wondered.
 
the hyperbolic patterns are already suggestive ;)
 
Anyhow I am off. G'night!
 
@robjohn Thanks (+1). I'll study the details these days since it takes some time to go through it.
 
In one window i see 128k and in another 131k ? @robjohn
 
@mick No... no loss of 3K
@mick where do you see 131k?
 
8:21 PM
@mick Ah. Phase plot of Jacobi's $\vartheta_2^4(q)$ over the unit disk. Green is purely imaginary. (As opposed to the usual scheme where red is purely real.)
 
@ccorn Makes sense.
 
@mick that might be a total of all my site reps, but I don't think it is that big
 
@robjohn you must be joking ... how many have over 120k ?
 
@mick The total should be 128687 (math is 128111)
@mick so I don't know where the 131K would have come from
 
its 128 now everywhere after the reload.
anyway I challange robjohn to answer my lastest question on main :p
@robjohn
 
8:25 PM
@mick robjohn got downvoted and undownvoted by 3k users
 
@Alizter theoretically possible i guess but unlikely. joke ?
 
Let's find out. Everybody downvote mick.
don't forget to cancel later
 
@BalarkaSen There are some things a man's gotta do sometimes. And he must do them alone.
 
@Alizter im gonna get kicked again today arent I ?
@DanielFischer is this women related ?
 
8:27 PM
I don't know. Goodbye. I need to think.
 
sigh @mick
 
@mick No, food related.
 
@BalarkaSen what ?
 
LOL @DanielFischer
 
@DanielFischer aha thats really important then :)
but it is possible to not eat alone !!! @DanielFischer
 
8:29 PM
@mick The eating was done before.
 
enough nonsense from me ... here is the link to my lastest question
http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/457867/asymptotic-expansion-of-ln-left-fracxax-a-right-in-form-of-sum-limit/457887?noredirect=1#comment2020048_457887
@DanielFischer you need to do the dishes alone ? :p
@robjohn do you accept the challange ? :)
 
"The feeling you get when you're trying to writing up all you have thought about on a problem" $\cong$ "The feeling you get when doing dishes after the eating"
 
@BalarkaSen starred !
Can I post my link again , or does that get me kicked ?
darn i posted the wrong link !
0
Q: Proving for $J(x) = \sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{x^n}{2^{n(n-1)/2} n!}$, $\left(J^{-1}(J(x)-J(x-1))-\dfrac{x}{2}\right)^2 < C $

mickLet $x>0$. Let $J(x) = \sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{x^n}{2^{n(n-1)/2} n!}$ Let $J^{-1}(x)$ be the functional inverse of $J(x)$. How do I show that for all $x$ there exists a fixed positive real constant $C$ such that: $\left(J^{-1}(J(x)-J(x-1))-\dfrac{x}{2}\right)^2 < C $ edit : I be...

thats the correct one
Sorry to be impatient guys , but i like attention and answers ...
 
Hi all!
 
@Khallil hi !
 
8:35 PM
How've you been, @mick?
 
@Khallil did we chat yesterday ?
 
If we have an equation that looks like $|a| = b|c|$ for $a,b,c>0$, can we use the fact that $|a| = \sqrt{a^2}$ and the same fact for $|c|$ to square our equality, then take the square root to get $a = |b|c$?
 
@Khallil I ve been impatiently waiting for an answer to my latest question ... as usual !
 
I don't recall us chatting, but I was on here pretty late, @mick.
^_^
 
your name looks familiar
 
8:37 PM
@Khallil I'd rather quotient by $|c|$
 
Hey, @Balarka!
Quotient by $|c|$?
 
$|a|/|c|=|a/c| = b$
And hello mystical greetings upto bijections.
 
Oh, then take the square and square root of the equality?
 
@BalarkaSen you mean for reals ?
 
@mick it holds on $\Bbb C$ also.
 
8:39 PM
hmm intresting
 
@Khallil I wouldn't do that. What is the original question?
@mick It's trivial.
 
yeah its trivial ... sorry.
i got confused.
 
prove it, @mick
 
@BalarkaSen 1 = 2 euh no 1 = 1. proof of confusion.
 
@robjohn my integral is wrong though ... (the way is presented there)
 
8:42 PM
@Chris'ssis the one we were talking about?
 
@robjohn Yes. That one is not $\pi/4$.
 
@Chris'ssis Oh... I thought since you were dealing with $\log(\sin(x)+\cos(x))$ that is what you meant
 
I challange the best mathematician on the chat now to solve my latest question on main !
:)
 
@mick, you can let $z_1 = a+bi$ and $z_2 = c+di$, then show that $\left| \frac{z_1}{z_2} \right|$ and $\frac{\left|z_1\right|}{\left|z_2\right|}$ are equal.
(Pythagoras and a little factoring.)
 
right @Khallil
 
8:44 PM
I'll give my question another go, @Balarka. If I can't crack it, I'll sleep on it and try it tomorrow. ^_^
 
OK.
 
@mick and I challenge you to prove this result :D $$\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac{\displaystyle \log\left(\frac{2 \sin(x)}{\sin(x)+\cos(x)}\right)} {\log(\tan(x))} \ dx = \frac{\pi}{4}$$
 
its much simpler , the signs do not matter. shortest proof ever.
not very formal or convincing perhaps
 
@Chris'ssis quotient of logs?
 
@robjohn Yes. The one above actually evaluates to $\pi/4$.
 
8:46 PM
mumbles ad hoc mumbles
 
@Chris'ssis use wolfram alpha :)
 
@mick wolfram is dead
 
@Chris'ssis no he is alive
 
@Chris'ssis It is either pretty simple with the right substitution, or it is extremely hard.
 
@robjohn Isn't there the middle way? :-)
 
8:51 PM
I think one needs to remove the trigonometry functions and work with logs and exp all the time ... just saying.
 
Looking at this last form I wanna hand out a present to @mick
 
@Chris'ssis i cant find your question on main or in profile .... must have missed.
 
@mick how do you know the inverse of $J(x)$ exists everywhere?
 
@mick $$\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac{\displaystyle \log\left(\tan(x)+1\right)} {\log(\tan(x))} \ dx$$
 
@UserX because all the derivaties of J(x) at any x > 0 are positive !
 
8:54 PM
@Chris'ssis It can first be simplified to $$\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sqrt2\sin(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x$$
 
so there is a bijection between positive reals @UserX
 
How do you intend to prove that that inequality holds $\forall x$?
 
@robjohn Can we do it?
 
You can't define the inverse for a negative quantity, but are $J(x)-J(x-1) >0 \forall x$?
 
@robjohn I checked that with Mathematica.
 
8:56 PM
0
Q: Proving for $J(x) = \sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{x^n}{2^{n(n-1)/2} n!}$, $\left(J^{-1}(J(x)-J(x-1))-\dfrac{x}{2}\right)^2 < C $

mickLet $x>0$. Let $J(x) = \sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{x^n}{2^{n(n-1)/2} n!}$ Let $J^{-1}(x)$ be the functional inverse of $J(x)$. How do I show that for all $x$ there exists a fixed positive real constant $C$ such that: $\left(J^{-1}(J(x)-J(x-1))-\dfrac{x}{2}\right)^2 < C $ edit : I be...

plz dont kick me :(
 
@mick don't keep posting it to chat...
 
@robjohn sorry. but i want attention for it ...
I hoped getting rep above 2000 would get me more attention , im a bit dissapointed :(
 
How would the rep get you attention?
 
@UserX well to convince people its a good question ...
 
@Chris'ssis Yep... with the right substitution it is easy :-)
 
8:59 PM
@robjohn did you use the gudermannian ?
 
Anyway, that's irrevelant. I need some clarification. You said that the inverse exists because the derivative is always positive for positive $x$. Why don't you keep that restriction and conjecture the inequality for all $x$ then?
 
@mick Nope...
 
@robjohn How did you do it? :-)
 
@UserX because it fails for negative real x !
 
@Chris'ssis First, note that $\frac1{\log(\tan(x))}$ is odd about $\pi/4$
 
9:00 PM
That's what I'm saying!
 
@robjohn Yeah
 
@UserX sorry about the " ! "
 
@Chris'ssis that knocks out the $2$ and the $\log(\sin(x)+\cos(x))$ to give us the integral I mentioned above.
18 mins ago, by robjohn
@Chris'ssis It can first be simplified to $$\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sqrt2\sin(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x$$
 
@robjohn not trying to be annoying but now your rep says 129 k instead of 128 k.
 
@Chris'ssis Now note that symmetry says $$\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sqrt2\sin(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x =-\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sqrt2\cos(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x$$
 
9:02 PM
@robjohn how did you evaluate that integral?
 
@UserX I think he is in the middle of explaining ..
 
I think he's hinting Chris's sis
 
perhaps perhaps perhaps
 
@UserX that integral is my creation
 
@Chris'ssis Add the left side to both sides to get $$2\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sqrt2\sin(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x =\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\tan(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x=\frac\pi2$$
 
9:06 PM
@robjohn I'm blind now ... wait a bit
 
@robjohn $$\int_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}} \frac{\log(\sin x)}{\log(\tan x)} \mathrm{d}x$$ does not converge. Are you allowed to do these manipulations?
 
@UserX it converges.
 
@robjohn you mean that $$\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac{\displaystyle \log\left(\frac{2 \sin(x)}{\sin(x)+\cos(x)}\right)} {\log(\tan(x))} \ dx=\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\sin(x))}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x$$ ?
 
@Chris'ssis yep
 
Plot[Log[Sin[x]]/Log[Tan[x]], {x, 0, Pi/2}]
 
9:07 PM
is there a generalization of semidirect products using twisted homomorphisms?
 
It contains a singularity
 
@robjohn They are not equal I think. I checked that with Mathematica.
 
hi
 
@Chris'ssis Ah... okay... the idea is right... you need the $\sqrt2$ to make things converge.
 
does anyone know about principal bundles and connections ?
 
9:13 PM
@OliverX1 i think everybody apart from me
 
@robjohn That way it works.
 
@Chris'ssis As UserX says, it does not converge without the $\sqrt2$, though the Cauchy Principal Value is right either way
 
Hello @AlexanderGruber
 
Should i offer a bounty to my question ??
 
@Alizter hi
 
9:15 PM
@UserX It works using the Cauchy Principal Value, but to get rid of the need for that, insert the $\sqrt2$ as I have
 
I have bad experiences with bounties :(
 
@mick just offer 50
 
@mick If you think that will give it more attention then yes.
 
but i dont want to loose reputation !! :p
 
which question is it?
 
9:17 PM
@mick Then consider other forms of making your question more attractive. Maybe edit it to make it more concise and easier to read.
@AlexanderGruber Here
 
@AlexanderGruber I want to post the link , but robjohn said i should not spam it here ... so go to my profile , its the last question ...
 
I'm trying to understand connections, but I've got no intuition for it...
 
@mick You can post the link if you're asked for it
That isn't eligible for a bounty, so you will have to edit and improve
 
@robjohn using that result, one can also compute $$\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac{\displaystyle \log\left(\tan(x)+1\right)} {\log(\tan(x))} \ dx$$ that is not that nice at first sight.
 
9:18 PM
@mick You can remove the condition for $x$ from the title. it adds too much clutter
add relvent bessel function tags
seq and series
 
@mick it's best to just use [ link ](http://......) when posting questions in chat so that it doesn't take up a banner-sized space
 
@robjohn what do you mean by "insert $\sqrt 2$"?
 
@Alizter its not a bessel function ... and the x > 0 is important.
 
@mick alitzer is giving you good advice. I will add this, your question is not very searchable.
If you modify the title to use words rather than an equation it is more likely to get attention
 
@mick the x>0 may be important but that is addressed in the body
 
9:21 PM
What type of function is it?
 
@Chris'ssis that does not converge, you need $$\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\log(\tan(x)+1)-\log(2)}{\log(\tan(x))}\mathrm{d}x$$
 
You don't have to have your entire question in the title
 
@AlexanderGruber not a standard function as far as i know.
 
@mick so it's just a power series, essentially? try adding the tag power-series
 
@robjohn Oh, right.
 
9:22 PM
(if that exists)
 
@mick Here is a problem already. I thought it was the bessel function and that you were trying to prove the series. This is because the question is hard to read.
 
@UserX maybe you need to refresh the page, but I inserted some $\sqrt2$'s into the formulas
 
functional equations may also be another tag to consider
 
maybe generating functions
 
User that can solve this type of problem: Looking through questions ahh no bessel functions ignore question
this is a problem
 
9:23 PM
hmm
have you tried using the theory of combinatorial species to solve this problem?
 
its not a generating function , its not a bessel function and its not functional equation ...
 
@mick Why do you use $J$ btw?
why not $f$ or $g$?
 
@AlexanderGruber I do not even know what " combinatorial species " is ?
 
$robjohn It's hard to notice, I'm reading the codes, still can't render the latex on mobile
 
@mick combinatorial species are endofunctors of the category of finite sets and bijections
they are ways of counting how many of a given type of structure exist on a set of size $n$
 
9:26 PM
@AlexanderGruber i do not know much about functors ... or category ... or finite sets :p
 
what's a twisted homomorphism, alex
 
@Alizter :) starred
 
no need
 
so for example, if you take a set with $n$ elements, and you associate with it the set of all possible graphs on that set, then that's a combinatorial species (the map is)
 
Alexander can take it alizter , its just joking ...
 
9:27 PM
long story short it gives you new ways of working with power series that can help you solve problems like this using counting, you might want to look into it
yeah I'm fine ;)
 
interesting
 
@AlexanderGruber whats a graph on a set ? you mean making couples ?
 
@mick graphs like in graph theory. vertex sets and edge sets
 
that sounds like the most complicated way to prove it !! then again im clueless and not sure if there is a simple proof.
 
I seem to remember that the language of combinatorial species never really caught on
 
9:29 PM
if you don't like that example there's lots of other species, maybe the most familiar one is the "power set" species $\mathcal{P}$, that sends a set $S$ to the set of subsets of $S$
 
This is a Naive question but cannot imagine why it would be downvoted
 
@mick the thing that makes me think it could work is that you're looking at $J(x)-J(x-1)$... the discrete differnce there happens a lot in species theory
@Mike it's another word for crossed homomorphisms
 
alas, I'll need a definition of that, too
 
Do we reject edits that are just romanising integrals?
Eg. They could of done tite + tags
 
@Alizter its upvoted now ( not by me ) score = 0 now
 
9:34 PM
What's the most elementary/concrete example of an indefinite integral that it's anti-derivative cannot be found(or can be but it is nearly impossible) but we don't have a problem evaluating that integral?
 
@MikeMiller crossed homomorphisms are defined with respect to an $f:Q\rightarrow \operatorname{Aut}(N)$ (so I guess they should be called "$f$-crossed homomorphisms")
 
@UserX ei(x) ?
 
A lot of improper integrals come to mind but I want the most elementary example
 
mhm, @AlexanderG?
 
@UserX $\displaystyle \int e^{-x^2}\ \mathrm dx$
 
9:35 PM
so, a homomorphism $\delta:Q\rightarrow N$ is $f$-crossed if $\delta(qr)=\delta(q)^{(r^f)}\delta(r)$
 
hmm
 
$\int_{\Bbb R_{\geq 0}} e^{-x^2} \mathrm{d}x$ also comes to mind too
But
 
(where I'm using $r^f$ to mean $f(r)$, like group theorists are wont to do)
 
I want something a highschooler can solve
I have to show to a girl that finding an antiderivative and using the FTC isn't the only way to evaluate definite integrals
 
@UserX If it doesn't have an elementary antiderivative then a highschooler most definitely won't be able to solve it.
 
9:36 PM
I am not real good with homology but I think these are related to $H^2$?
 
I don't know anything about group cohonology yet, unfortunately, but I think you're right
 
Any obvious graphical examples?
 
@UserX FTC = ? how about riemann sums ? allowed ?
@UserX how about the gamma function ? or do you want to avoid recursion ?
 
@UserX does it need to be exact or are numerical techniques ok?
 
9:39 PM
@UserX cause trapezoid rule is pretty easy to explain, and easy to extend to composite trapezoid. And you could try Simpson's rule too if she liked that, though it is a bit harder.
 
@ccorn Times both sides by 0. Divide by 0.
 
@MikeMiller if it has the form $q\mapsto \delta(n^{-q})^{(r^f)}n$ it's a principal $f$-crossed homomorphism
 
@Alizter LOL, but is that Euler?
 
@ccorn I know euler did some unheavenly manipulation of sums to generate regularised zeta values but this is ridiculous
 
i think they generate all $f$-crossed homomporhisms, or some type of reduction like that. I never really see any of them discussed that aren't principle.
 
9:41 PM
@ccorn i know euler demonstrated " student mistakes " rather then make wrong proofs. maybe this caused the confusion.
 
interesting
 
@ccorn I added a relevent comment
 
@MikeMiller what ?
 
Howdy @Mike @Alex @UserX
 
9:42 PM
:(
 
commenting on what Alex said, @mick
 
Oh, and hi @Alizter @Nick ... This is too much work
 
Oh Ted you definitely have the answer to this
 
@TedShifrin Just go Hi @Y'all.
 
Yeah, no more hellos
Can I still say y'all when I move out of the south?
 
9:44 PM
@TedShifrin How can I show to a high-schooler that evaluating a definite integrals doesn't always require finding the antiderivative and using the FTC? I'm confident you have the right example.
 
@TedShifrin What is stopping you? Canadians?
 
yes
 
@Mike @Ted!
 
Nothing involving special functions, approximation rules, weird techniques etc. Elementary stuff
 
oh no
 
9:46 PM
@UserX, the easiest example is $\int_0^\infty e^{-x^2}dx$.
 
what i said
 
@Mike i need halp!!!11!
 
How am I supposed to show what this evaluates to though...
Plus improper integrals aren't being taught.
 
@Ted throws table for a lack of hello
 
@UserX but a function that has no elementary antiderivative ... is not elementary ... so isnt that a paradoxal question ?
 
9:47 PM
@UserX Then what need is there for evaluation without antiderivative?
 
@BalarkaSen and still you do not get kicked !
 
@mick I am not using swear words, kiddo.
 
@mick Wrong $e^{-x^2}$ is very much elementary.
 
A definite integral that is way easier with a trick rather than FTC would work too
 
Otherwise, if you eliminate functions that have no elementary antiderivative, there is no answer.
 
9:47 PM
@BalarkaSen your a kiddo too ! :p
 
smacks @Balarka
 
@Alizter not its integral ?
 
Much less of a kiddo.
 
How do I explain that to someone who has barely touched simple definite integrals though...
 
@TedShifrin Well, we're even.
Now help me with a bit of topology ahem please.
 
9:48 PM
so much violence here :)
 
@mick You said a function that has no elementary antiderivative ... is not elementary. This means you meant the function is not elementary.
@UserX If they have barely touched it, why show them?
 
solution of a quintic is also not elementary, assuming SC
 
The point is that students should compute Riemann sums in situations that they can't cheat and use FTC.
 
@TedShifrin agreed !
 
Cheat? Lol that's a weird use of the word cheat
 
9:50 PM
@TedShifrin Or the marks are given for using RS.
 
i have 41 views now and not a single upvote !!!
throws a table too :p
 
I have a serial downvoter. @Balarka, stop it.
 
I'll create a question about this. Hopefully someone can come up with an ingenious example. Is this an MSE question though?
 
@TedShifrin Looks like you have two. Or a sock puppet serial downvoter.
 
Oh, maybe @Alizter.
 
9:52 PM
@UserX It sounds like you're either going to get closed for too broad, or not answered for too restrictive
 
There is none, @UserX.
 
either way if you post use the soft question tag
 
@TedShifrin I proved that a point $x$ and a closed set $A$ not containing $x$ on a metric space can be separated by open sets like this : $A$ is closed $A'$ is open hence there is an open sphere $S_r(x)$ around $x$ not overlapping $A$. Take the union $\cup S_{r_i}(x_i)$ around $x_i$s on $A$ such that $r_i + r < d(x, x_i)$. This is our desired open set around $A$.
^ that turned out to be false
Take a point outside the real line and an open sphere with boundary touching the real line
 
@mick If you like chatting you would remove that. I would not say that is appropriate.
 
How can I correct my argument? At least give a hint :(
 
9:53 PM
@Alizter its meant as joke ... :)
 
@TedShifrin are you sure? What's another example other than Gaussians?
 
@Ted H-cobordism today in the seminar.
 
Your notation suggests $A$ countable. @Balarka
 
@UserX Perhaps $\log$ if you are just learning definite.
 
@TedShifrin why should I care about countability?
uncountable union also leaves openness invariant
 
9:55 PM
i only throw virtual tables ;)
or multiplication tables :)
 
$\int_9^1 dt/\sqrt{1+t^3}$, @UserX
 
I don't know what you meant by that @Alizter but holy shit eureka. Inverse function theorem for integrals on $\log x$
 
@Balarka! Yes, you need $r$ small enough.
 
how do i remove the video ?
no delete option ?
 
@TedShifrin why the '!'?
 
9:57 PM
@UserX, lower limit $0$
 
flag yourself @mick
 
@BalarkaSen ok
 
There are 2 mods (and a demi god) in here you can flag
 
We need a full god.
 
@robjohn I don't know how to do that. I suspect feynman trick?
 
9:59 PM
who are the 2 mods and demi god ???
 
@AlexanderGruber and @robjohn
 
Alex, rob and Daniel
 
Daniel not a mod
 
is a god
 
Oh demi god
LOL
 

« first day (1540 days earlier)      last day (3480 days later) »