/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16177423
Some book refs:
>analysis esp. Fourier theory
>differential equations
Hassani
>Classical mechanics
Arnold
>Thermodynamics
>Statistical mechanics
Kardar I&II, Pathria, Kubo

>for theorists: groups and Lie algebras, differential geometry
Hassani, Hall, Lee, Nakahara

Also, may I add to this:

>General Relativity
Weinberg, Zee, Wheeler, Wald, Carroll, Hawking&Ellis

>Particle physics
Halzen&Martin

>QFT
Zinn-Justin, Peskin, Bjorken, Tong notes, Weinberg I,II,III, Srednicki

>Quantum information
Preskill

>String theory and Supergravity
Zwiebach, Polchinski I&II, Kiritsis, Freedman, Schwartz

>>15257894

Can you guys help me with this question?
It's asking me to say if it is an equivalence relation
[math]R={(x;y)∈ N2/3|x−y}[/math]
Here's what I got so far:
We know that for a relation to be considered equivalent it has to attend three basic properties - reflexiveness, symmetry and transitivity, I concluded that they're both reflexive and transitive, but I can't see how it is symmetric, since this is the natural set, there's no way that both x-y and y-x pertain to the relation because that y-x implies a negative number and there aren't any in the natural's set, can we conclude that this is a vacuous truth and thus the relation is equivalent? Answer key says it its, but I'm not sure.

Can you guys help me with this question?
It's asking me to say if it is an equivalence relation
[math]R = {(x;y) ∈ ℕ2/ x-y is divisible by 3}[/math]
Here's what I got so far:
We know that for a relation to be considered equivalent it has to attend three basic properties - reflexiveness, symmetry and transitivity, I concluded that they're both reflexive and transitive, but I can't see how it is symmetric, since this is the natural set, there's no way that both x-y and y-x pertain to the relation because that y-x implies a negative number and there aren't any in the natural's set, can we conclude that this is a vacuous truth and thus the relation is equivalent? Answer key says it its, but I'm not sure.

Suppose a study estimated the population mean for a variable of interest using a 99% confidence interval. If the width of the estimated confidence interval (the difference between the upper and the lower limits) is 600 and the sample size used in estimating the mean is 1000 what is the population standard deviation?

>>11432112
This but unironically.

>>10882851

You can smuggle in the premise of humanism into any conversation on existensial ethics; a premise which is fundamentally based on Christian epistomology and metaphysical premises as it's both philosophical and historical foundation; into any conversation with a worshipper of mohamed about the fields of politics/ethics/religion/education/whatever and make the conversation firmly based on physical evidence/logical reasoning- thereby removing the entire basis of his argument for sharia law (an interventionist theocratic universe) from which be satisfied that you have a solid logical and well reasoned proof as to why he's wrong, why his system is wrong, and why it can't and should never be implemented.... to which he/they won't care two shits about; likely ripping apart your entire multipage rationalist thesis and spitting upon the remains; upon which you'll be forced into a life or death struggle for the retention of your life and liberty in whatever civilization you live in, the second the muslim factions in that society gain a significant faction to near parity in the totality of power division within the state; failure of which will relegate you to the status of "second class citizen"- which is really just a euphemism for Muslims to abuse you, your family, steal your property, and rape your wife/daughters while backed both explicitly by muslim power, and implicitly by deliberate failure to protect/proscute "criminals" who do these things to non-muslims (muslim police winking at criminals when they tell them that abuse of non-muslims won't be tolerated).