carmo55

@carmo55@lemmy.zip

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How Did The World Get So Ugly?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, we should go back to monarchs building lavish displays of wealth while normal people live in horrible conditions. It’s horrible how in democratic countries we try to use tax money to maximally benefit citizens. /s

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Elon Musk has an h-index.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Depending on the context (was the whole paper built on wrong assumptions or was there just some small error) that can still be a good thing?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨trick OR treat⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨some days i cant even⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Won’t work sadly, the “counter sound” can’t be in phase in multiple locations because of delay and reflections. Headphones can do ANC because the ear is basically a single point so the mic can pick up exactly what you’re about to hear and then compensate.

  Using a speaker like that would just create double the leafblower noise.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨i enjoy high fructose corn syrup too⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Extinct!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What kind of locomotion is that? What is the evolutionary advantage?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Sometimes when I’m really tired in the morning I get out of bed like this, it’s the path of leadt resistance.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IT'S A TRAP⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  A practical application is for example in probability theory (or anywhere that deals with measures) such as this question:

  If we generate a random real number from 0 to 1, what is the probability that it is rational?

  Because we know that the continuum is so much larger in a sense than the set of rationals, we can answer this confidently and say the probability is zero, even though it is theoretically possible for us to get a rational number.

  Statistics deals with similar scenarios quite frequently, and without it we wouldn’t have the modern scientific method.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IT'S A TRAP⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  There are infinitely many rational numbers between any two integers (or any two rationals), yet the rationals are still countable, so this reasoning doesn’t hold.

  The only simple intuition for the uncountability of the reals I know of is Cantor’s diagonal argument.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Listen here, Little Dicky⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  It is just a definition, but it’s the only definition of the complex exponential function which is well behaved and is equal to the real variable function on the real line.

  Also, every identity about analytical functions on the real line also holds for the respective complex function (excluding things that require ordering). They should have probably explained it.