Hey Zig Forums! Are you smart? Then you should be able to solve this

Hey Zig Forums! Are you smart? Then you should be able to solve this

Attached: E1E0848A-1D73-423B-AEE2-5340D8BFCD58.jpg (1038x1181, 65.93K)

already debunked

needs a dx on the end to mean something

You’re’nt white

It’s implied

Pianissimo to fortissimo and the whole note gets the count

Attached: 1516405214466.jpg (740x737, 287.42K)

ok, boomer

Antiderivative calculator shows that when x approaches infinity it leads to 1 and at negative infinity there is no value, so you can put in 0, so 1-0 = 1 is the answer

Nigger

undefined
/thread
no further replies are needed in this slide thread.

XX? TERF TRASPHOBIC BIGGOT!

Attached: 3duwie.png (960x508, 383.88K)

Fucking leafs

This
no it is not. It must be specified either at the end as the leaf says or in the limits or under the integral sign in set notation. Get your shit together before rambling like a retard, OP.

Do you need your hand held for everything?

Gay. Solve this.

Attached: Complex_zeta.jpg (821x820, 207.7K)

>dx is always implied because the integral only contains occurences of x
You're a fucking retard.

1

The answer is obviously 1

>leaf
>shitty post

What makes this interesting is you can't take the derivative nor the Anti derivative of this integral, meaning the calculators that do this work for you comes back with a shrug and a: "You can't do that".

The question becomes, why can't we calculate the area under this particular curve?

>why can't we calculate the area under this particular curve?
Because OP refused to identify with respect to which variable the area under the curve is being calculated.

First smart post

Attached: Ramanujan.gif (297x45, 3.06K)

Obviously non-trivial zeros are on critical line, but I can't fit proof in 4chin comment. Again, it should be obvious to any non-retard

There’s only one variable. This shit is implied.
Just imagine a dx after the x^(1/x)

You need to re-take calc 1 as you did not learn it all.

ok

Attached: Page (1) - Copy.jpg (2550x3300, 780.46K)

Dance for me & solve this simple joint pdf question

Attached: ez_jacobian.png (510x51, 11.59K)

Because infinities are whacky

The answer is -1

Attached: Page (2).jpg (2550x3300, 557.47K)

it's a ligma.

its really not

page3

Attached: Page (3).jpg (2550x3300, 468.29K)

yes! that's the answer! very good

function is not even defined for negative values of x though so how could you take the integral over the negatives?

Fuck your chain rule or whatever the fuck you want me to do

It diverges faggot

Undefined for values less-than-or-equal-to 0 and the limit as it goes to positive infinity is 1, so it doesn't converge.

undefined, OP sucks cock

actually well-formed and fun question for yall instead:

what is the maximum value attained by f(x)=x^(1/x) with domain of non-negative real numbers?

it's not solvable, it's a limit function.
you have to graph it.

>Lithuanian intelligence

>Using discrete math

I fucking hate the fucking retardation in math notation. I swear, half the problems that people have with math is because unsystematic wishy-washy notation. Shit like d2f(x)/dx2 makes zero sense on several levels but everyone is okay with it. I could understand if it was some quick sketch on blackboars but why is this shit is in BOOKS AND PAPERS? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

Attached: 96F0A34A-F40B-4383-AAC0-DAE24C42A23B.jpg (835x715, 115.82K)

can probably use Euler's identity somehow

Don't care, didn't ask, plus you're white...

op confirmed pajeet

Engineer here who has been working for 3 years now. Does every other engineer brain dump this useless bullshit? In the past there were were people literally hired as computers to solve this shit. Now we have actual mechanical computers to do it for us.

Go into complex numbers

either that or a ntma.

.99999... = 1
Prove me wrong.

This is where I get my political news
Christ have mercy

merchant x jew = kike.

Easy.
It’s about tree fiddy

Silly cunt, that's sheet music

Complex in negatives, does not converge 0 to infinity.

Attached: xthrootx.png (897x431, 28.79K)

>mathematical proof that OP is a faggot

Attached: op.png (1026x554, 662.27K)

You're implied faggot

Attached: 1601340358848s.jpg (249x217, 8.75K)

Im a senior ME student... struggling a bit with this online machine design class.. is it safe to assume I will be able to dump shit like this post bachelor's degree?

Sorry, had to seize my opportunity to ask.

Attached: DiOWUjo.png (634x483, 103.93K)

That is not how math works. You have to specify it in the equation.

Attached: E6CA2CE2-73DB-4BC9-A491-4A59EF13E099.jpg (1024x576, 37.35K)

I know, pretty awesome right, who would have thought you could solve it that way.

Attached: Page (4).jpg (2550x3300, 407.72K)

> lim a->-infinty of x^(1/x) dx from a to 0 + lim b->infinity of x^(1/x) dx from 0 to b
there ya go nigger

pg 5

Attached: Page (5).jpg (2550x3300, 475.1K)

*both integrals

Yes it's a math equation. The conclusion is that you can't burn 6 million jews with 30 ovens.

>hurr you don't have dx!

Anyone that fusses about notation is a retard that doesn't know math. Probably an engineering major that thinks they know math well because they took calculus.

In grad level measure theory my professor never wrote "dx" unless it was ambiguous. It's like how whenever anyone posts a math problem on Zig Forums with an integral in it (even if it's extremely difficult or impossible to solve) the engineering and CS niggers go

>DUDE WE JUST DID THIS IN CALC LMAO XD

or discuss trivial "math problems" that rely on ambiguous notation that nobody cares about.

Attached: thats-a-stupid-shirt-you-dont-surf-youve-never-surfed-lying-little-shit.jpg (735x741, 193.19K)

>math thread
>no German anons
Disappointing

the algebra is amazing

Attached: Page (6).jpg (2550x3300, 442.81K)