/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12236680

33KiB, 500x258, file.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 00:41:45 2020 No.12236680 View Reply Original Report

Why are computers so bad at math?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 00:54:00 No.12236706 Report

Quoted By: >>12241709

>>12236680
???? Computers were created for number crunching. They aren’t good at extrapolating logic

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 00:56:39 No.12236710 Report

Quoted By:

Because they can't think broadly, they can only compute and follow logical processes when true thought requires something more abstract reasoning, faggot

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:07:14 No.12236730 Report

Quoted By: >>12236776 >>12236977 >>12239539

>>12236680
wouldn't it be +-2x?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:10:09 No.12236739 Report

Quoted By: >>12236755 >>12236776

>>12236680
That's correct

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:13:50 No.12236755 Report

Quoted By: >>12236761 >>12236776

>>12236739
The derivative is 2x no?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:15:26 No.12236761 Report

Quoted By: >>12236764 >>12236776 >>12236902

>>12236755
Yes.
That's 2x.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:16:11 No.12236764 Report

Quoted By: >>12236776 >>12236793

>>12236761
Holy shit I just noticed that lol. Why'd the computer do the derivative like that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:18:48 No.12236776 Report

Quoted By: >>12236793 >>12240433

>>12236680
No retard, by square root it means principal square root. If you want the correct answer write 1/2 instead of the root.
>>12236730
>>12236739
>>12236755
>>12236761
>>12236764
Brainlets

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:24:30 No.12236793 Report

Quoted By: >>12236843

>>12236764
Chain rule
>>12236776
Retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 01:41:43 No.12236843 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236793
>Retard
explain

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 02:04:21 No.12236902 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236761
Except at x = 0.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 02:08:24 No.12236913 Report

Quoted By: >>12236939

IEEE 754 is flawed but still one of the best models available for computing floating point numbers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 02:16:23 No.12236939 Report

Quoted By: >>12236971

>>12236680
Did you tell W|A that x is a real variable?
>>12236913
Ever heard about unums?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 02:31:25 No.12236971 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236939
Unums are bloat as fuck. 99.99% of things don’t need them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 02:33:46 No.12236977 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236730
Bruv how're you going to get a negative tangent on an strictly increasing curve

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 03:00:49 No.12237033 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
$(2 sqrt(x^4))/x = 2 x$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 03:01:59 No.12237035 Report

Quoted By:

$\frac{2*sqrt(x^4)}{x} = 2x$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 04:30:56 No.12237287 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
>inputs question in stupid equivalent form
>receives answer in stupid equivalent form
Computers were created for shitposting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 07:37:27 No.12237672 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
Because people are bad at math. Computers compute, they do exactly what you asked them to do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 07:48:13 No.12237689 Report

Quoted By:

sqrt(x^4) =/= x^2

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 07:51:52 No.12237693 Report

Quoted By: >>12237963

>>12236680
That's the correct answer, idiot.

You don't believe sqrt(x^4) = x^2, do you? Because it's not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 10:20:36 No.12237963 Report

Quoted By: >>12238018

>>12237693
>You don't believe sqrt(x^4) = x^2, do you? Because it's not.
of course it's true, are you high?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 10:41:33 No.12238018 Report

Quoted By: >>12238143

>>12237963
No, I'm math-abled.
Of course a high-schooler wouldn't understand principal branches.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:40:58 No.12238143 Report

Quoted By: >>12238163

>>12238018
>muh complex numbers
nobody gives a shit lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:50:54 No.12238163 Report

Quoted By: >>12238168

>>12238143
Except everybody doing real work, "lmao".

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:54:01 No.12238168 Report

Quoted By: >>12238225

>>12238163
so, nobody in this thread. comprehension problems?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 12:18:42 No.12238225 Report

Quoted By: >>12238307

>>12238168
>this thread = the world
>truth is relative to the type of audience
no u

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO sq.png, 22KiB, 809x642

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 13:00:53 No.12238307 Report

Quoted By: >>12238856

>>12238225
you under the impression that anyone in this thread is talking about complex functions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 14:14:39 No.12238485 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
The calculator behaved x as a complex number that's why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 14:19:44 No.12238502 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
>computer gives you a more general answer that works in all cases because you didnt specify to real numbers
>LOL why would i want the complex derivative, the computers an IDIOT
you dont belong in math if you think like this

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 16:13:53 No.12238856 Report

Quoted By:

>>12238307
I'm under the impression that OP assumed computers to be bad at math because he is math-disabled and couldn't understand the answer, instead of assuming that it's his own fault and that there's something to be learned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 16:26:06 No.12238891 Report

Quoted By: >>12239767

They aren't. The programmers that made whatever program that does that calculation are bad at programming.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 16:28:52 No.12238896 Report

Quoted By: >>12239130 >>12239148 >>12239775 >>12240110

Ironically GPT-3 does struggle at basic arithmetic, despite computers having been superhuman at for the longest time. just something like 4 + 11 it's unlikely to get right.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO _20201016_193954.jpg, 61KiB, 669x447

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 17:40:27 No.12239130 Report

Quoted By: >>12239148

>>12238896
Guess you're right..

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 17:45:54 No.12239148 Report

Quoted By: >>12240110

>>12238896
>>12239130
I remember it being much better than this. Did it already get the Tay treatment?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 17:58:53 No.12239183 Report

Quoted By:

For anyone interested in this kind of stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_differentiation

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO f7e4f6b658d8489e11a970587ee77bc1.jpg, 68KiB, 951x800

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 18:08:01 No.12239213 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
Computers follow paths which are more optimized for their brute calculations, us humans can't eve compete with machines, soo keep crying little fleshbag because we're coming for you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 18:36:45 No.12239292 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
It gave you the most correct result it was able to give using your input. The problems with computers are rarely the machines or the programmers. The problems are nearly always with management/marketing and end user retardation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 18:42:53 No.12239308 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
the hell are you talking about? it literally did chain rule on a symbolic x. It's correct

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:02:40 No.12239539 Report

Quoted By: >>12239582

>>12236730
sqrt(x^4) = (x^4)^(1/2) = x^(4*1/2) = x^2

d/dx x^2 = 2x

Keep in mind that roots being plus minus only counts when evaluating polynomials, for all other cases it's strictly positive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:04:50 No.12239551 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
It's not the computers that's bad at math, it's the people programming them. Computers are excellent at math, it's just that some programmers don't define mathematical operations accurately enough for a computer to give a good answer. Things like integer overflows and floating point rounding are also results of programmers not understanding computers and maths well enough to make a robust system that solves the edge cases.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:17:15 No.12239582 Report

Quoted By: >>12239593

>>12239539
>(x^4)^(1/2) = x^(4*1/2)
This step is not universally allowed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:19:30 No.12239593 Report

Quoted By: >>12239611

>>12239582
it is in $\mathbb{R}$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:23:55 No.12239611 Report

Quoted By: >>12239629

>>12239593
He is right. I'm drunk af i drank 1 bottle wine but even i realized your mistake.
According to your step
sqrt(x^2) = x^(2*1/2) = x ??
f. no
sqrt(x^2) = abs(x) [alwayssss]
assuming x is from RRR

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:30:03 No.12239629 Report

Quoted By: >>12239639

>>12239611
embarrassing post
give me one real number x such that sqrt(x^4) = x^2 is not true

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 20:34:02 No.12239639 Report

Quoted By: >>12239752

>>12239629
No nho thats true sqrt(x^4) = x^2 is for every real number correct. The step
sqrt(x^4) = x^(4*1/2) is dangerous.
You should hve said
sqrt(x^4) = abs(x^2) = x^2

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 4KiB, 292x92

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:03:13 No.12239737 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
Anon, I cheat on all my tests with wolfram alpha too, but at least learn how to cheat properly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:05:31 No.12239752 Report

Quoted By:

>>12239639
>The step
>sqrt(x^4) = x^(4*1/2) is dangerous.
it's true

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:06:33 No.12239755 Report

Quoted By: >>12239766 >>12240586

>>12236680
$sqrt{x^4} = sqrt{ (x^2)^2 } = abs{x^2} = x^2$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:08:19 No.12239766 Report

Quoted By:

>>12239755
ok went full retard with that
$\sqrt{x^4} = \sqrt{(x^2)^2}= |x^2| = x$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:09:01 No.12239767 Report

Quoted By:

>>12238891
Algebraic manipulation systems are harcore as fuck, fuck you, write somethig better then.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 21:10:48 No.12239775 Report

Quoted By:

>>12238896
Why did you expect a general statistical model for natural language to perform great at mathematical reasoning? That's a very uneducated expectation.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO _20201016_194519.jpg, 73KiB, 632x479

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 22:24:30 No.12240110 Report

Quoted By:

>>12239148
>>12238896
27

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 29KiB, 650x350

Anonymous Fri 16 Oct 2020 23:34:09 No.12240433 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236776
It does the same either way

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 00:42:20 No.12240586 Report

Quoted By:

>>12239755
>abs()
kill yourself

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 00:52:38 No.12240602 Report

Quoted By: >>12240623

there is nothing wrong about this picture

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 00:59:01 No.12240616 Report

Quoted By: >>12240639

>>12236680
$\frac{2x^3}{\sqrt{x^4}} = \frac{2x^3}{x^2} = 2x$

It's you who is bad at math

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 01:00:38 No.12240623 Report

Quoted By: >>12249015 >>12249018

>>12240602
$\sqrt{x^4} = x^2\\ \frac{d}{dx}(x^2) = 2x$

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 01:06:01 No.12240639 Report

Quoted By: >>12240703

>>12240616
No shit. The issue is it doesn't do that simplification

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 01:34:57 No.12240703 Report

Quoted By: >>12240728

>>12240639
You asked wolfram to take a derivative not to simplify it

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 34KiB, 456x796

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 01:46:56 No.12240728 Report

Quoted By:

>>12240703
It is (somewhat) simplified, though

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 03:23:30 No.12240913 Report

Quoted By: >>12240939 >>12240942 >>12240947

>>12236680
Whats wrong with this? Its actually ncie that the computer understood to hold onto the ambiguity sqrt has instead of assuming positive and simplifying to 2x

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 03:42:44 No.12240939 Report

Quoted By:

>>12240913
if it wanted to keep the ambiguity, it should have simplified to
$ \frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{x^4})\\ = \frac{2x^3}{\sqrt{x^4}}\\ = \frac{2x^3}{\pmx^2}}\\ = \pm2x $

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 03:44:01 No.12240942 Report

Quoted By:

>>12240913
if it wanted to keep the ambiguity, it should have simplified to
\frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{x^4})\\
= \frac{2x^3}{\sqrt{x^4}}\\
= \frac{2x^3}{\pmx^2}\\
= \pm2x

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 03:46:46 No.12240947 Report

Quoted By: >>12241556

>>12240913
if it wanted to keep the ambiguity, it should have simplified to

$\frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{x^4})\\ = \frac{2x^3}{\sqrt{x^4}}\\ = \frac{2x^3}{\pm x^2}\\ = \pm2x$

goddamnit, I can't post tonight

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 06:39:35 No.12241339 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
Maybe try using a non retarded CAS

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 06:44:30 No.12241349 Report

Quoted By:

>get unexpected result
>instantly assume it's the computer's fault
>instead of assuming there's truth behind it and something to learn
Stay uneducated, /sci/.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 09:13:44 No.12241556 Report

Quoted By: >>12241649

>>12240947
$\sqrt{x^4} \neq \pm x^2$

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 10:19:19 No.12241649 Report

Quoted By: >>12241705 >>12243851

>>12241556
it littorally does though, it's indeterminate

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 11:06:40 No.12241705 Report

Quoted By: >>12242683 >>12243828

>>12241649
sqrt(x^2) = |x|
sqrt(x^4) = x^2
brainlet

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 11:10:29 No.12241709 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236706
>They aren’t good at extrapolating logic
BETTER THAN (You)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 11:52:08 No.12241756 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
It's not the computer's fault if the programmer was busy masturbating with one hand and programming with the other. Meanwhile he ended up forgetting to add a few branches in the decision tree for simplification of the equation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Oct 2020 19:46:29 No.12242683 Report

Quoted By: >>12243847 >>12245658

>>12241705
prove it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 02:24:38 No.12243828 Report

Quoted By:

>>12241705
>|x|
nigger

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 02:34:37 No.12243847 Report

Quoted By: >>12243858

>>12242683
It's a definition.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 02:35:40 No.12243851 Report

Quoted By:

>>12241649
x^2 Is always positive in any well ordered field

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 02:36:50 No.12243858 Report

Quoted By:

>>12243847
prove the definition

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 15:15:40 No.12245658 Report

Quoted By:

>>12242683
let x be non negative. then sqrt(x^2) = x. on the other hand |x| = x.
let x be negative. then sqrt(x^2) = -x. on the other hand |x| = -x.
this proves sqrt(x^2) = |x|. sqrt(x^4) = x^2 follows from this and from |x^2| = x^2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 18:39:38 No.12246213 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
It's x, you cannot have delta x, if you do not have itterative form of mathematical expansion, and therefore you don't have real number line in which you can measure distance.

Also problem may lie in fact, that computer knows it got two products from square root, but you do not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 19:56:33 No.12246495 Report

Quoted By:

>op posts bait
>literally every person on /sci/ cant solve a simple math problem
never change /sci/

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 9A7A0130-E3CC-4238-BA7A-0F40B6E6 (...).jpg, 8KiB, 237x123

Anonymous Sun 18 Oct 2020 20:12:48 No.12246556 Report

Quoted By: >>12247448

Yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 00:21:51 No.12247448 Report

Quoted By:

>>12246556
based python poster

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 04:21:27 No.12248091 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
this is right tho

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 08:31:47 No.12248533 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
the answer is right it just isn't simpllified. /sci btfo by a computer yet again

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 08:33:36 No.12248535 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680

2x^3/sqrt(x^4) = 2x^3/x^2 = 2x, computer is right, brainlet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 09:00:27 No.12248593 Report

Quoted By:

>>12236680
I don't know but mandatory online tests make me seethe because it's so easy to loose bullshit marks due to messing up the websites very specific syntax.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 11:23:00 No.12248809 Report

Quoted By:

Steven Wolfram must be seething, that complete retard.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot from 2020-10-19 10-33 (...).png, 9KiB, 241x153

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 13:34:12 No.12249013 Report

Quoted By: >>12249016

>>12236680

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 13:36:51 No.12249015 Report

Quoted By:

>>12240623
and?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 13:38:01 No.12249016 Report

Quoted By:

>>12249013
for most purposes, floating point approximations are ok, but if you really want to deal with symbolic math you need arbitrary integer and float precision, which means a variable memory data structure which, of course, slows everything down.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 13:39:05 No.12249018 Report

Quoted By:

>>12240623
(x^2)^2 = x^4
(-x^2)^2 = x^4

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Oct 2020 14:03:05 No.12249072 Report

Quoted By:

The absolute state of sci

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches