What's one thing your learned at college/university that blew your mind?
-
And the first thing they teach you in college is "High School was bullshit, here's the real way to do it..."
That's really interesting. It must be very much dependent on where you are because my first class at uni they literally said the opposite. "Everyone who didn't take xyz class in high school take this sheet with a bunch of extra shit you need to learn before next week. Good luck."
-
Bit too busy with the ole undiagnosed adhd and a hankering for world of Warcraft
You can tell from my transcript the exact week Elder Scrolls Oblivion came out.
-
This post did not contain any content.
That Earth was in fact way older than 6000 years.
-
In engineering we have a simmillar thing for some cases where we replace 0 with a variable that is 0 at the limit but not 0 itself then continue on like nothing happened. It all cancels out at the end but feels so wrong.
Can you give an example?
-
My polisci teacher day 1 really hammered in that literally everything is political, that it is unavoidable, and all you do by avoiding politics is giving up your own agency when it comes to the things that you care about. It was 2017, so a lot of political apathy at the time, idk it reallly made it click that every single thing is poltical, based on it or decided by it.
Like not caring about politics is just not caring about how you live your life and giving up any control you have to others. People only realize when they lose something they care about like porn games lol
-
That's really interesting. It must be very much dependent on where you are because my first class at uni they literally said the opposite. "Everyone who didn't take xyz class in high school take this sheet with a bunch of extra shit you need to learn before next week. Good luck."
@jordanlund apparently didn't take xyz class.
-
Whether or not an irregular verb retains its irregularity depends largely on how much it is used in everyday life. If it's a common word, it's more likely to stay irregular, because we're frequently reminded of the "correct" form. If it's a rare word, the irregularity tends to disappear over time because we simply forget. That's why "to be" couldn't be more irregular (it's used enough to retain its forms) and the past participle of "to prove" is slowly becoming regular "proved" (it's rare enough to be forgotten).
yes i like language very much
Edit: typo
Wait, what's the other option for past tense 'to prove'?
-
This post did not contain any content.
We are all pretty much screwed
-
Wait, what's the other option for past tense 'to prove'?
"I have proven"
-
Can you give an example?
wrote last edited by [email protected]In control dynamics u have a transfer function and need to determine the Routh-Hurwitz criterion it will sometimes give u division by 0 errors so u sub in a variable and say its almost zero but not quite and continue on like nothing happened.
Eg determining the stability of a system with characteristic eq of A(s) = 3s^4+6s^3+2s^2+4s+5=0
If u do a RH array u will end up with a zero which then will give u (4*0β30)/0 so u sub in π for 0 giving (4πβ30)/π and continue on. That eq obviously evaluates to negative infinity. U are essentially just saying π is an infinity small positive number ie it is the number next to 0 on the positive side.
EDIT: If the markdown is messed up the eq should be
A(s) = 3s**4+6s**3+2s**2+4s+5=0When using ** as super notation
-
This post did not contain any content.
Shale tastes like mud, yes, but it has the consistency of a chocolate bar if you eat a little.
Honestly not bad. Great experience.
-
This post did not contain any content.
That if you're an international student at a small, struggling school, you can miss half your classes and bullshit your way through most assignments and they'll still give you a degree.
In other words: I learned nothing.
-
"I have proven"
Ah, duh. Interesting that it's moving to the more typical "ed" ending
-
Ah, duh. Interesting that it's moving to the more typical "ed" ending
Exactly, that's the expected path: the irregular form disappears as more and more speakers forget it and instead, "on the fly", apply the general rules of word formation in their language. Over time the "regularised" form becomes the accepted, "correct" one.
-
This post did not contain any content.
My highschool friends weren't really friends, just people who'd been temporarily thrown into the same unfortunate position as me.
-
My highschool friends weren't really friends, just people who'd been temporarily thrown into the same unfortunate position as me.
Relevant: https://youtu.be/rGDBTLT9__s
(if I'm honest, this is not his finest work. his videos are usually way funnier than this)
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
Functions on real numbers are incredibly werid.
There are continuous but nowhere differentiable functions.
There are continuous and monotonically increasing function that goes from 0 to 1 (i.e. surjective function [0,1] β[0,1]), that "almost never" increases; specifically, if you pick a point at random, that point will be flat on said function with probablity exactly 1 (not almost 1, but exactly 1, no approximation here).
More impressively, you can have function that is continuous, but you cannot find a connected path on it (i.e. not path connected). In plain word, if anyone told you "a function is continuous when you can draw it without lifting your pen". They have lied to you.EDIT: the last one (crossed out) is wrong. Intuitively "topologists' sine curve" contains two parts; you can neither find a distinct seperation for them (i.e. "connected"), nor can you draw a path that connects the two part (i.e. not "path connected"). However, topologist's sine curve is not the graph of a continuous function.
-
Physics in general has not caught up to the fact that locality isn't a thing. Nobel prizes were handed out for this in I think 22... And people still think the notion of spacetime can be taken seriously. It can't.
What does that mean?
-
This post did not contain any content.
That a diploma doesn't mean shit beside someone being able to say what their teacher want them to say... but that was not really new, it was just a lot more sad to experiment as naive me was hoping for something more.
-
In control dynamics u have a transfer function and need to determine the Routh-Hurwitz criterion it will sometimes give u division by 0 errors so u sub in a variable and say its almost zero but not quite and continue on like nothing happened.
Eg determining the stability of a system with characteristic eq of A(s) = 3s^4+6s^3+2s^2+4s+5=0
If u do a RH array u will end up with a zero which then will give u (4*0β30)/0 so u sub in π for 0 giving (4πβ30)/π and continue on. That eq obviously evaluates to negative infinity. U are essentially just saying π is an infinity small positive number ie it is the number next to 0 on the positive side.
EDIT: If the markdown is messed up the eq should be
A(s) = 3s**4+6s**3+2s**2+4s+5=0When using ** as super notation
control dynamics
Well, that's a relief! That's a completely different kind of engineering than I studied, so I can stop being worried that there was something I was supposed to have learned but didn't.
