3,563 reputation
1723
bio website
location Germany
age
visits member for 2 years, 8 months
seen 1 hour ago

$1$ : It means "there exists something"

$0$ : It doesnt mean "there exists nothing", instead it means "there exist something but that is nothing"


Accept policy:

My accept policy is to accept the first completely correct answer. Acception is final and will never be changed. If no complete answer is available after a certain time, I accept partial answers.

Answering policy:

I try to answer at least two times more than the number of questions that I ask because my questions are usually two times more difficult than the questions that I am able to answer.

Voting policy:

I try to upvote all constructive answers to my questions and all nice questions/answers. I try to avoid downvoting and rather I use diplomatic ways to overcome the problems. All intentionally problematic questions or answers will be downvoted.

Respect policy:

I respect all persons who are willingly to help others. I show immediately in the comments that I dislike arrogant types.


11h
revised doppler effect… how does this image explain it?
deleted 1 character in body
12h
answered doppler effect… how does this image explain it?
16h
comment Converting Mathematica code to matlab code
The OP says "Mathematica code to matlab code" and this is really my understanding.
17h
answered Converting Mathematica code to matlab code
17h
comment Converting Mathematica code to matlab code
@dustin there IS a program. see the answer below.
1d
awarded  Constituent
Dec
16
comment (Though?)Expression Rearranging
I think one can do a bit more than that. Your problem is stated here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambert_W_function#Generalizations with no solution. But in the same page there is also a taylor series expansion of W function around $0$ or $r$. In your case there is apolynomial term instead of simply $x$. What I would personally do is to obtain it numerically. Then find an MMSE polynomial solution to the numeric function.
Dec
16
comment (Though?)Expression Rearranging
your work about the substitution is of no use. It doesn't simplify anything at all. Finding the roots of that equation is eqivalent to solve the omega term given in the answer. There is no closed form solution for those equations at least to my knowledge.
Dec
16
comment (Though?)Expression Rearranging
So very simply if you are looking for $y$, that is given in the answer. I cannot simplify it and I dont think that someone can give a simple closed form simplification to that form and there is no other $y$ either. So what are you looking for? for $y$ or something else?
Dec
16
answered is conditional expectation less than unconditional one?
Dec
16
answered (Though?)Expression Rearranging
Dec
11
reviewed Approve Formula for $1! \times 2! \times \cdots \times n!$?
Dec
11
comment Lebesgue integrable discontinuity points
but then the set of discontinuity points do not have a measure bigger than zero or am I wrong?
Dec
11
comment Lebesgue integrable discontinuity points
$1_\mathbb{Q}$ has all measure $0$ points?
Dec
10
reviewed Approve Complex numbers finding real values of x and y
Dec
10
reviewed Approve Congruences - proof problems
Dec
10
answered Great contributions to mathematics by older mathematicians
Dec
8
awarded  Caucus
Dec
8
revised Is the distance induced by the topology of the set a metric
added 226 characters in body
Dec
8
comment Is the distance induced by the topology of the set a metric
ne znayu. May be yes may be no) okay $\mathcal P$ is formed of probability measures. So all $Q$ needs to be a probability measure. Actually I have a little more work. May be I can add it.