929 reputation
1719
bio website wolfram.com
location United States
age 37
visits member for 3 years, 11 months
seen Aug 27 at 23:22

The gravatar was made with Mathematica, and inspired by this.

The contents of my posts are my own opinion, and do not reflect the opinions of my employer.


Sep
24
suggested suggested edit on Solving an equation with trig functions and two different angles
Sep
24
answered Pure maths vs applied
Sep
22
revised derivatives using chain rule
deleted 2 characters in body
Sep
22
answered derivatives using chain rule
Sep
22
comment Derivative using product rule and chain rule
As a second point, I'm not a fan of Newtonian notation to indicate a derivative, e.g. $f'(x)$, and I prefer Leibniz's, e.g. $df/dx$, because it is difficult to tell which variable to use when calculating a derivative like, $\cos(a^3 + x^3)'$. In first semester calculus, this is easier as it is likely to be $x$. But, Leibniz's notation leaves less room for ambiguity, and that can be a life saver when doing these. However, professors insist on using Newton's form, so you have to learn it, also. But, I'd change it to the other form when working these.
Sep
22
awarded  Citizen Patrol
Sep
22
comment Derivative using product rule and chain rule
This is just a relatively straightforward application of your previous question. I'd suggest looking at Jonas' answer again.
Sep
12
awarded  Analytical
Sep
8
revised Determinant and power series
added align environment: formula exheeded bounding box.
Sep
8
suggested suggested edit on Determinant and power series
Aug
27
comment How to solve a system of dot products
You have a $t$ in the denominator of the $b$ term in your known solution. Is that supposed to be a $\tau$?
Aug
27
comment Showing that $\int\limits_{-a}^a \frac{f(x)}{1+e^{x}} \mathrm dx = \int\limits_0^a f(x) \mathrm dx$, when $f$ is even
Great solution. My only question is what led you to it? Most likely it was the observation that $(2)$ is true, but I'm curious about the thought process.
Aug
22
revised Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
clarified
Aug
22
revised Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
added link; rearranged for clarity
Aug
22
revised Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
fixed typo
Aug
22
revised Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
deleted 1 characters in body
Aug
22
comment Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
@J.M., wrote up the answer.
Aug
22
answered Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
Aug
22
comment Determinant of a special skew-symmetric matrix
@J.M., the key is that for $n=2$, $\mathbf{E}^{-1} = \mathbf{E}^T$, so $\mathbf{F}^T \mathbf{E}^{-1} \mathbf{F} = \mathbf{F} \mathbf{E}^T \mathbf{F}$. From there, it is straightforward to show that it must be zero. Overall, it may make the induction of the entire problem easier if $\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{E}$ were swapped.
Aug
21
comment Deriving the inverse of $\mathbf{I}$+Idempotent matrix
I am interested in more detail, if you would. A reference would be sufficient.