Recent content by lynxman72

Hi all, I'm looking for a positive real-valued function definition on all of R such that the function f(x) is continuous and integrable (the improper integral from -infinity to infinity exists and is finite) but that lim sup f(x)=infinity as x goes to infinity. I'm thinking about something with...

Carl, I'm sorry, I'll get back to you soon on it, right now just trying to finish up finals (last day is tomorrow)...I'll also check out that paper you referenced that you said should be accessible, we'll see what i can do with it, as this is actually my first semester studying math and physics...

I'm actually an undergrad where Bender teaches and I've gotten to know him a little bit, he does a lot of work in this area, I think it's pretty much all he works on these days (that and coaching the Putnam team!), so you may want to check out his other recent publications as well...

I think it's enough to say that have any type of experience with something that's isn't deep means, uh, just that; you don't know it deeply...if you're from the narrow side I think that will probably make perfect sense.

Hey thanks for the resopnse, I do agree with you about understanding the basics (though on one hand it seems like understanding every detail of the fundamentals helps most in placing the more advanced subject in context and understanding why results are significant). in my very limited...

Hi, I thought perhaps some of the more experienced members of the forum could give me some advice: So I'm an undergrad I've got 3 more semesters to go before I graduate, and basically last summer I just woke up one day and decided I wanted to be a theoretical or mathematical physicist, so I...

if you love physics nothing else should matter, that's the end of the story, buck stops right there.

No I don't think your insane I think that's perfectly normal actual and I don't know why more people don't go for it like that (of course though people tell me I'm crazy since I am in the middle of doing my school's whole 4 year undergrad math major in 1 year and taking 2 to 3 grad physics...

So what you're saying is then I will have four Lagrange multipliers? I treat it as four constraint equalitites?

Right, I was just saying all I could figure out how to do was try to find this global max and hope it fit the constraints (it didn't), so any advice on another way to proceed?

oh sorry by the way I also know that each variable is >=0 from the context of the problem (each variable represents a serving of food). thank you

Hi all, I'm having trouble with the following problem: It was given as a word problem from which to infer the mathematics but basically it is this: Maximize: f(x,y,z,t,w)= ln((y^2-x^2)(z^2-t^2)*w^3)+.8x-1.2y-20z/17+14t/17-w^3/(pi^3) Subject to the constraints: 0<= .5x+y+3z+3y+2.5w<+30...

Thanks for the link. Where I'm confused is what to do about having both an upper and lower bound as my constraints, if it was just upper bound I see what to do but I don't know how to handle both.

That's my problem, I don't understand how to do that; I have two constraint equations for five variables and so I don't know how to figure out the boundaries of each variable...

Jason, thanks for the response. I understand how to use the Lagrange multipliers for an equality constraint. I think I didn't describe my problem clearly, the inequality constraints are on the variables, not on the function itself...here is my specific problem: the function to be maximized is...