[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ r8k / ck / wooo / fit / random / doomer / f1 / foodism / harmony / lathe / lewd / warroom / wtp ]

/join/ - join

join

Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload1 per post.


File: 31e2e5b0a0c64b4⋯.png (256.17 KB,409x532,409:532,Screenshot_2024_05_03_2015….png)

 No.510

t is a fair question to ask, “why bother?”, when it comes to analysis. There is a

certain philosophical satisfaction in knowingwhy things work, but a pragmatic person

may argue that one only needs to know how things work to do real-life problems.

The calculus training you receive in introductory classes is certainly adequate for

you to begin solving many problems in physics, chemistry, biology, economics,

computer science, finance, engineering, or whatever else you end up doing—and

you can certainly use things like the chain rule, L’Hôpital’s rule, or integration by

parts without knowing why these rules work, or whether there are any exceptions to

these rules. However, one can get into trouble if one applies rules without knowing

where they came from and what the limits of their applicability are. Let me give

some examples in which several of these familiar rules, if applied blindly without

knowledge of the underlying analysis, can lead to disaster.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ r8k / ck / wooo / fit / random / doomer / f1 / foodism / harmony / lathe / lewd / warroom / wtp ]