308 reputation
111
bio website
location The Matrix
age
visits member for 1 year, 11 months
seen Sep 11 '13 at 1:58

The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth. That you are a slave, Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind.

Are We Living in a Simulated Universe?


Nov
24
awarded  Popular Question
Sep
24
awarded  Yearling
Aug
20
accepted What is mathematical identity behind Charge continuum?
Aug
20
revised What is mathematical identity behind Charge continuum?
deleted 73 characters in body
Aug
20
asked What is mathematical identity behind Charge continuum?
Aug
20
accepted What is more compact equation of this relationship?
Jul
29
accepted What is Lagrange's identity for Bra Ket notation?
Jul
28
comment What is Lagrange's identity for Bra Ket notation?
Bra-Ket notation
Jul
28
revised What is Lagrange's identity for Bra Ket notation?
deleted 2 characters in body
Jul
28
asked What is Lagrange's identity for Bra Ket notation?
Mar
6
comment what is simplify, of $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
ok thank you. so $\sinh^{-1}\tan x$ is The inverse Gudermannian function,
Mar
6
accepted what is simplify, of $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
Mar
6
revised what is simplify, of $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
added 8 characters in body; edited title
Mar
6
comment what is simplify, of $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
@Dominic Michaelis can solve it $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
Mar
6
asked what is simplify, of $\sin^{-1}\tanh\theta=?$
Feb
7
comment Whether is my conclusion about euler gamma function correct? is it new conclusion $\Gamma (0)=i\pi$?
@Peter Tamaroff maybe this point that in terms of the Gamma Function is only valid for integer values
Feb
7
revised Whether is my conclusion about euler gamma function correct? is it new conclusion $\Gamma (0)=i\pi$?
added 213 characters in body
Feb
7
revised Whether is my conclusion about euler gamma function correct? is it new conclusion $\Gamma (0)=i\pi$?
edited title
Feb
7
revised Whether is my conclusion about euler gamma function correct? is it new conclusion $\Gamma (0)=i\pi$?
added 36 characters in body; added 212 characters in body
Feb
7
awarded  Custodian