user17753

Hey for Geometric Median (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_median) the first formula on Wikipedia, what is subscript 2? Does that mean to take the square?

So if I expand it near zero that's the same thing as thinking about big oh with x->0?

Got it, thanks

Is there something I have to do to get the mathjax to show up in chat? Or do you guys just read it as code?

So do I always assume x to 0 if they don't specify it?

I had a quick question on Taylor Series for e^x as shown on wolframalpha.com/input/?i=e%5Ex+taylor+series wondering why they put O(x^6) as a stand-in for the remaining terms if they are much higher order. How is O(x^6) an upper bound on those?

Hi guys

Well I'll just make a question out of it thanks

I'm sure this type of problem has a name or something, but I don't know what it is.

In this small case, it reduces them by half

So it removes some from the k^n possiblities

So AAB and BAA become equivalent.

Just care about how many A's or B's are in the strings.

Just trying to determine what is needed if I generalize this to say an alphabet of k elements and string of n length.

Well I wrote out by hand AAA, AAB, ABB, ABA, BAA, BAB, BBA, BBB which is 2^3, then I can see it's either 3A 0B, 3B 0A, 2A 1B, or 1A 2B. Which is four ways.

I don't know the nomenclature, trying to figure out what I need to learn to solve that kind of general problem.

Right, another way to think about it is you list all the possibilities, then sort them alphabetically (So BAB would be ABB, ABA would be AAB, etc.), and remove duplicates.

Hey guys if I have a length 3 string with alphabet {A,B} it's easy to see that there's 2^3 possibilities. Though, what if I only care about the total count of A's or B's in the string? Then say AAB = BAA. I can see there's only 4 such outcomes, not sure what the general formula/approach is for the general case, though.

15 minutes IIRC

OK thanks guys

In other words, the first n elements of the positive integers.

Basically I wanted to express the set of positive integers starting from 1 to n, in order. Just didn't know if there was a succinct way to do that. I have seen [n] used in some texts, but I didn't think it was standard.

Sorry I mean positive integers, not natural numbers.

Hey guys, is there a better way to express the set of natural numbers up to n. For example something like this: {1,2,3, ..., n} but without the ...?

Hey guys, is it correct to write $n,k \in \Bbb N$ meaning both n and k are variables that belong to the set of natural numbers. Or does it have to be written out as $n \in \Bbb N, k \in \Bbb N$?

Thankless job, it should be automated according to a specific heartless algorithm that no one can argue with.

w/e I think more effort should be placed on helping people with the maths and less with who needs to be banned and whose comment should be deleted or undeleted because it has something insensitive in it or w/e

I don't think that's fair, because suppose you made an obvious error in your maths in a comment and you wish to protect your innocence? Who cares about seeing history of thinly veiled jabs or trolls, that's not what this site is supposed to be about?

@BenjaLim Awesome quote

idk about you guys, but I feel as though currently SE sets the bar pretty high even with its so-called flaws

Oh gotcha

Couple years seems like so long, what if you've forgiven those that originally offended you during all that time?

how long will it take and how will I know where it is if (no pun intended) you're gone?

where's it at?

Wow, melodramatic

@skullpatrol what question?

Hmm maybe they could issue a tough bounty question to banee's for a chance at early ban lift, followed by requiring to post something nice about the party they offended?

Well, not to sound insensitive, but it's not exactly an outlier to see someone post something rude on the internet.

Such comments are tailored to prompt a response, if removed or w/e then he knows he's got to you and thus the victor.

truer words never typed before

Wow, I never knew math could get so emotional.

My advice, more cartoons. Take a lesson from Larry Gonick. All I can say.

I find intimidated to even post a question, because inevitably some variant has already been answered but I lack the expertise to find it more quickly than I can type up the question. So it just ends up in no questions being asked =p

@EdGorcenski Maybe I'm just making a simple mistake or something, but applying it to that specific problem I don't really see how it can be simplified to a point that's any easier to solve for than the original. Obviously the log approach seems more straight forward, I guess.

@EdGorcenski OK I'll try that, thanks.

@Ed Right, so I think the author stated the power, n, was real. So in that case the binomial theorem would not help?

Alright sorry for bothering you, I honestly did not understand what the description means.

I was reading this series for e^x: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=e%5Ex+taylor+series

Naw I just had a simple math question, I didn't really see any active chats around here.

Yo, anyone there?