Math help

[Truronian]

2) v and w are parallel.

Different vectors, same direction.

This is rubbish, I realised as my computer was turning off. I was thinking of lines...

|v| = |w|, ie true.

Vectors have no position in the plane, so it does not make sense to say "move |w|"

What does the eu and ev mean?

e_u is a unit vector in the direction of the vector u.

e_v is a unit vector in the direction of the vector v.

ie. |e_u|=|e_v|=1

 

[Bluemofia]

This is rubbish, I realised as my computer was turning off. I was thinking of lines...

|v| = |w|, ie true.

Vectors have no position in the plane, so it does not make sense to say "move |w|"

Yeah, I just realized that. I was thinking too much on the movement of said vector away from the origin would give different positions, and somehow would lead to different results.

e_u is a unit vector in the direction of the vector u.

e_v is a unit vector in the direction of the vector v.

ie. |e_u|=|e_v|=1

Ah, we use the double absolute value brackets. EX: ||U||

Ok, I understood how to do this logically, just not how to mathematically prove it.

 

[Bill3000]

I was thinking too much on the movement of said vector away from the origin would give different positions, and somehow would lead to different results.

It doesn't say that one of the vectors is a displacement vector, though!

 

[Bluemofia]

I know. It's just me over analyzing everything again, overlooking the basics.

 

[Mise]

(e_u+e_v) is the trivial bisector, so w is a bisector.

Is that the sort of thing you can state without proof? (in an exam I mean)

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Just out of curiosity, what course level are you taking, Bluemofia?

That's improper, Integral. There are limits to my patience, you know.

You guys are a laugh riot! Don't ever change, Catharsis.

Reminds me of another one:
"You don't know the difference between your asymptote and a hole in the graph!"

 

[frob2900]

Just though I'd add a groaner to the math jokes list:

Two functions are walking down the road, one is a polynomial in x, the other e^x. Suddenly the polynomial gets a scared look on its face.

e^x asks "Whats the matter?"
Polynomial replies "I think we better run, there's a differential operator following us!"
e^x replies "Hah, I don't care, I'm the exponential function, my Taylor series has an infinite amount of terms! Let the differential operator try to do it's worst!"

Polynomial in the meanwhile has run away.

After a few moments, the differential operator catches up with e^x and with an ominous voice says "Hello, I'm d/dy..."


Sorry about that, couldn't help myself.

 

[Mise]

A: What's the integral of 1/cabin ?

B: Log Cabin!

A: No, it's a houseboat! You forgot the C !

 

[Truronian]

Is that the sort of thing you can state without proof? (in an exam I mean)

I would... I'm not entirely sure what they would want for a proof.

(e_u+e_v).(e_u-e_v) = 0

=>

(e_u+e_v) and (e_u-e_v) are perpendicular, then use properties of triangle to show its equal bisection might cut it.

 

[Bluemofia]

Just out of curiosity, what course level are you taking, Bluemofia?

Calculus II.