meta user
network profile
| bio | website | stevenvh.net |
|---|---|---|
| location | Flanders, Belgium | |
| age | 52 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 9 months |
| seen | Dec 23 '12 at 7:40 | |
| stats | profile views | 183 |
That's "Steven" (with the "n" at the end)
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." — Bertrand Russell
Product designer, consumer electronics: audio (with Philips), home automation.
Done computer science in a previous life too.
Belbin team roles: Plant and Resource Investigator
Personal values: respect, honesty, pride, modesty, fairness
I yell because I care
|
Jun 11 |
comment |
How do I scale 3 fractions to 3 natural numbers? "and that r is maximal rational number". Is $r$ rational, or natural? |
|
Jun 11 |
asked | How do I scale 3 fractions to 3 natural numbers? |
|
Jun 11 |
comment |
Missing steps in the calculation of limit? Yes, thanks. +1. It's too early for an accept, there might come other answers. |
|
Jun 11 |
revised |
Missing steps in the calculation of limit? added 13 characters in body |
|
Jun 11 |
comment |
Missing steps in the calculation of limit? Thanks for the quick reply. But my problem is that in the application frequency is zero, I apply the limit for that case, as I mention in my question. |
|
Jun 11 |
asked | Missing steps in the calculation of limit? |
|
May 31 |
revised |
GCD of rationals added link to site |
|
May 31 |
comment |
GCD of rationals Thanks for the Wolfram Alpha reference too. Interesting site, though I guess you guys would use Mathematica. Also gives additional information like series representation and prime factorization. I took the liberty of adding a link to it. |
|
May 31 |
suggested | suggested edit on GCD of rationals |
|
May 30 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
May 29 |
comment |
GCD of rationals @WillieWong - Why did you remove the [GCD] tag? Because it's a new one? But it is about GCD, and the [GCD] tag may help people who're looking for information. |
|
May 29 |
revised |
GCD of rationals added 66 characters in body |
|
May 29 |
asked | GCD of rationals |
|
May 24 |
comment |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles The "boring statement" is interesting. I just posted about the Fourier series on electronics.stackexchange, and used this to explain an alternative definition (sum of only sines instead of sin + cos)! :-) |
|
May 24 |
revised |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles fixed lapsus in equation |
|
May 24 |
revised |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles added 32 characters in body |
|
May 24 |
comment |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles You're right, the sine and cosine in the quote seem to refer to functions. I'll fix it. |
|
May 24 |
comment |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles @Rahul - I think I can see that. I see the curve of both functions, and they're indeed $\pi$/2 apart. That $\pi$/2 is in the argument of the function, in the function's value there's nothing of that left. I understand that the sine value 0.6 is Obama, but this guy claims that Obama and Bush are orthogonal. Two scalars! |
|
May 24 |
comment |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles @Hurkyl - The question is [here](electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/32269/). John is Telaclavo, I am stevenvh (I must have my existing account here merged with this new one). Most of the discussion has been deleted, however, in the name of peace :-) |
|
May 24 |
comment |
Explaining why sin and cos are *not* at right angles @Rahul - Yes, that's what John also used as argument: sin(x + $\pi$/2) = cos(x). But that only means that the sin and cos then are equal. Sin(37°) = 0.6 and cos(37°) = 0.8. How are 0.6 and 0.8 90° apart?? |
