Centurion@lemmy.world to Funny: Home of the Haha@lemmy.world · edit-22 months agoIt could have been so easy lemmy.worldimagemessage-square35fedilinkarrow-up1399arrow-down134
arrow-up1365arrow-down1imageIt could have been so easy lemmy.worldCenturion@lemmy.world to Funny: Home of the Haha@lemmy.world · edit-22 months agomessage-square35fedilink
minus-squareLeate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up93arrow-down3·2 months agoThere’s 3 variables and 1 equation. This is unsolvable.
minus-squaresomethingsomethingidk@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up29·2 months agoSince we’re just making shit up anyway Assume k=0 and n is the last natural number. Solved.
minus-squareoberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up14arrow-down1·edit-22 months agoRemoved by mod
minus-squareoberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down1·edit-22 months agoRemoved by mod
minus-squareaffiliate@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 months agoif n = 0 then k = ∞ and just about any value of x works in this case. however x = arcsin(nk -1) still doesn’t work since 0 * ∞ is not defined. so i think the B grade is fair. (this is all assuming we’re working on the riemann sphere)
There’s 3 variables and 1 equation. This is unsolvable.
Since we’re just making shit up anyway
Assume k=0 and n is the last natural number. Solved.
Removed by mod
arcsin(nk-1) ?
Removed by mod
if n = 0 then k = ∞ and just about any value of x works in this case. however x = arcsin(nk -1) still doesn’t work since 0 * ∞ is not defined. so i think the B grade is fair.
(this is all assuming we’re working on the riemann sphere)
Removed by mod