(Inspired by Reddit post of the last month)

    • jbrains
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What a curious and needlessly judgmental reply!

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No judgement, but you should know it’s not that simple. You can’t just pull out your calculator and add together an uncountably infinite collection of values one-by-one.

        I mean, you could add together a finite subset of the values, which turns out to be the only practical way fairly often because a symbolic solution is too hard to find. You don’t get the actual answer that way, though, just an approximation.

        The actual symbolic approaches to integrals are very algebra-heavy and they often require more than one whiteboard to solve by hand. Blackpenredpen “math for fun” on YouTube if you want to see it done at peak performance.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Huh. If that’s the case, I totally missed it. Integrals sounded a lot simpler to me before I had to actually solve them, too, and that’s where I assumed OP was coming from. A /s would have helped.

    • Magnetar@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean they’re right, Leibniz used a modified s for summa, sum. And an integral is just a sum, an infinite sum over infinitesimal summands, but a sum nevertheless.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, they are right about that being the general concept. I only take issue with the implication that it’s equally simple.