this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

15532 readers
237 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Look it is so simple, it just acts on an infinite dimensional vector space of differentiable functions.

[–] chortle_tortle@mander.xyz 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Mathematicians will in one breath tell you in one breath tell you they aren't fractions, then in the next tell you dz/dx = dz/dy * dy/dx

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Have you seen a mathematician claim that? Because there's entire algebra they created just so it becomes a fraction.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 day ago

Brah, chain rule & function composition.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago

(d/dx)(x) = 1 = dx/dx

[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I found math in physics to have this really fun duality of "these are rigorous rules that must be followed" and "if we make a set of edge case assumptions, we can fit the square peg in the round hole"

Also I will always treat the derivative operator as a fraction

[–] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

2+2 = 5

…for sufficiently large values of 2

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago

i was in a math class once where a physics major treated a particular variable as one because at csmic scale the value of the variable basically doesn't matter. the math professor both was and wasn't amused

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] jaupsinluggies@feddit.uk 0 points 1 day ago

Statistician: 1+1=sqrt(2)

[–] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Computer science: 2+2=4 (for integers at least; try this with floating point numbers at your own peril, you absolute fool)

[–] callyral@pawb.social 0 points 23 hours ago

0.1 + 0.2 = 0.30000000000000004

[–] WR5@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

I mean as an engineer, this should actually be 2+2=4 +/-1.

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago

I always chafed at that.

"Here are these rigid rules you must use and follow."

"How did we get these rules?"

"By ignoring others."

[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not even a fraction, you can just cancel out the two "d"s

[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 day ago

"d"s nuts lmao

[–] rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Derivatives started making more sense to me after I started learning their practical applications in physics class. d/dx was too abstract when learning it in precalc, but once physics introduced d/dt (change with respect to time t), it made derivative formulas feel more intuitive, like "velocity is the change in position with respect to time, which the derivative of position" and "acceleration is the change in velocity with respect to time, which is the derivative of velocity"

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago

Possibly you just had to hear it more than once.

I learned it the other way around since my physics teacher was speedrunning the math sections to get to the fun physics stuff and I really got it after hearing it the second time in math class.

But yeah: it often helps to have practical examples and it doesn't get any more applicable to real life than d/dt.

[–] KTJ_microbes@mander.xyz 0 points 1 day ago

Little dicky? Dick Feynman?

[–] vaionko@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Except you can kinda treat it as a fraction when dealing with differential equations

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago

Oh god this comment just gave me ptsd

[–] JustAPenguin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Only for separable equations

[–] devilish666@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Is that Phill Swift from flex tape ?

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 0 points 1 day ago

De dix, boss! De dix!

[–] moobythegoldensock@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It was a fraction in Leibniz’s original notation.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

And it denotes an operation that gives you that fraction in operational algebra...

Instead of making it clear that d is an operator, not a value, and thus the entire thing becomes an operator, physicists keep claiming that there's no fraction involved. I guess they like confusing people.

[–] justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 day ago

Division is an operator

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why does using it as a fraction work just fine then?

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 0 points 1 hour ago

It doesn't. Only sometimes it does, because it can be seen as an operator involving a limit of a fraction and sometimes you can commute the limit when the expression is sufficiently regular

[–] BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What is Phil Swift going to do with that chicken?

[–] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The will repair it with flex seal of course

[–] BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

To demonstrate the power of flex seal, I SAWED THIS CHICKEN IN HALF!

[–] callyral@pawb.social 0 points 23 hours ago

clearly, d/dx simplifies to 1/x

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 0 points 23 hours ago

I still don't know how I made it through those math curses at uni.

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago

If not fraction, why fraction shaped?

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago

Having studied physics myself I'm sure physicists know what a derivative looks like.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

1/2 <-- not a number. Two numbers and an operator. But also a number.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The thing is that it's legit a fraction and d/dx actually explains what's going on under the hood. People interact with it as an operator because it's mostly looking up common derivatives and using the properties.

Take for example ∫f(x) dx to mean "the sum (∫) of supersmall sections of x (dx) multiplied by the value of x at that point ( f(x) ). This is why there's dx at the end of all integrals.

The same way you can say that the slope at x is tiny f(x) divided by tiny x or d*f(x) / dx or more traditionally (d/dx) * f(x).

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 0 points 1 hour ago

The other thing is that it's legit not a fraction.