meta user
network profile
| bio | website | myindigolives.wordpress.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | Arizona | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 2 years, 1 month |
| seen | yesterday | |
| stats | profile views | 43 |
Descriptive statistics, data quality, probability models for all things risk.
Need to find work ASAP!
Twitter @EllieAsksWhy
|
May 20 |
awarded | Constituent |
|
May 13 |
awarded | Caucus |
|
May 9 |
awarded | Critic |
|
Mar 26 |
comment |
Complex Analysis- Research @JpMcCarthy Thank you so much. That is what I wanted to know. |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Centers of the osculating circles along an ellipse You (both) are doing your part to ensure that the following remains true dataanxiety.tumblr.com/post/44843126462/math-is-fun As a nice Jewish widow (though still of child-bearing age), I am allowed such humor. |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Centers of the osculating circles along an ellipse Thank you Pengfei. As for Robert Israel, that is just delightful! I am so happy! I am smiling and giggled slightly. Thank you so much. That is wonderful. |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Centers of the osculating circles along an ellipse Actually, now I'm confused. The question is titled, "Center of the osculating circle of an ellipse". I see the ellipse. I see your answer, which says that C(t) is not an ellipse, but rather, is described by coordinates x,y that are the solution to a 6th degree polynomial equation. Where is the circle that is referenced in the title of the equation? |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Centers of the osculating circles along an ellipse I intend no disrespect, in any way whatsoever, and was first to up vote your answer. But how did you answer this so quickly, including entering all the notation correctly in LaTeX? That is amazing! Sorry, rhetorical question. |
|
Mar 23 |
comment |
Complex Analysis- Research This will seem chiding, I realize. But I was just reading a heinously precious beauty-of-mathematics post and realized that absolute yes's and not-yes's are what I find beautiful about math. Please, @JpMcCarthy keep math beautiful for me; satisfy my curiosity about Jesse's comment, i.e. he inquired whether his further elaboration captured the intent of your answer (in response to OP's request for such). Is the answer yes? Or is it no? |
|
Jan 15 |
revised |
Results that came out of nowhere. Added links, and additional content, improved format |
|
Jan 5 |
comment |
Is mathematics the only language that is not subject of interpretation? David, thank you so much! That helps a lot, especially your second comment, which specifically addressed my painfully belabored first comment ;o) Yes, I agree that it is better to avoid labels such as Platonism and (social or other) constructivsim, especially here, in the context of the question. We have such a difficult time (collective we, beyond even SE) with interpretation and nuance, even for supposedly defined terms. Thanks again for your promptness and detail! |
|
Jan 4 |
comment |
Is mathematics the only language that is not subject of interpretation? @akkkk After reading all of this, all the answers and comments, the essential reality of life at a given moment in time is expressed best with your final sentence "in the end, even mathematics is about convincing other mathematicians that you are right". It is applicable to the physical sciences too. It isn't as rational as I'd want, but it IS universal to the human experience. You are quite sensible, I think. |
|
Jan 4 |
comment |
Is mathematics the only language that is not subject of interpretation? Also, in your final paragraph, are you distinguishing between "perspectives" and "approaches" in a definition-type way? Or perhaps you are using the words as synonyms? I am not trying to be gratuitously difficult or contrary. I am just confused. I'm sorry. |
|
Jan 4 |
comment |
Is mathematics the only language that is not subject of interpretation? You need to use bullet points. I think you are saying in your 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence, POV_1 = {if A then (B or C or D)}. In paragraph 2, POV_1 is inconsistent with POV_2, where POV_2 = a set of three questions E, F and G, where G is the difference between E and F (I think). The reason I resorted to this was because I was trying to understand your final paragraph. What two perspectives are you referring to in your penultimate sentence, POV_1 v. POV_2, or E v. F (essentially the same as G)? In the final sentence, what are "the former" and "the latter" each referring to? |
|
Jan 4 |
comment |
Proving $x+\sin\sqrt{x}$ is uniformly continuous - not sure of my solution @DavidMitra Good idea, but you do realize who asked the question in that other other post, yes? |
|
Jan 4 |
comment |
Limit of geometric mean of N radii of an ellipse @user54331 Math SE is no mere forum ;o) We can oblige with a citation in either BibTeX or amsrefs style, whichever your preference may be! Look up, at the end of each answer, and note on the left, where it says "share edit flag". Click "share". There will be a pop-up, with a shortened URL, inset in a rectangular blue-gray colored field. On the lower left corner of that blue-gray field, it says "cite". Click on that, and choose your preferred citation style. This feature is available for every Math SE answer. |
|
Dec 31 |
comment |
Visualising Bayes theorem I'm sorry for taking so long to respond! My browser hung while editing this, maybe it was due to too much notation? Anyway, I didn't want to lose everything, finally got it back! I tried to address what you asked about in your comment before you asked, as I thought similarly i.e. WHAT does this have to do with Bayes's Theorem?! The Wikipedia talk page comments mention that lack of clarity too ;o) Tell me if this remains unclear, okay? |
|
Dec 31 |
revised |
Visualising Bayes theorem Added more detail |
|
Dec 29 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Dec 29 |
comment |
Visualising Bayes theorem @Henry Thank you so much for adding the diagram! I will edit my answer somewhat, now that I can see the diagram clearly. |
