Recent content by tauon

Hi. This might be very late now, but I didn't check this thread since I got the solution. :p In case someone runs into it in the future, this is the derivation I used Oh, and the excerpt is from "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics" (authors Roger Bate, Donald Mueller, and Jerry White) the 1971 edition.

Never mind. I got the derivation. I also found out I am blind/can't read.

Homework Statement I do not understand how the authors got the time derivative of equation 1.5-4 in the form given at 2.5-2. Homework Equations The Attempt at a Solution \frac{d}{dt}\frac{p}{1+e...

Pretty much every proof of this I've seen uses the axiom of countable choice at some part or another, and I never got why, since it's pretty cumbersome. Here's the sketch of a proof I wrote for the "fact" that a countable union of countable sets is countable: Let \ P:=\{\pi\in\mathbb{N}|\ \pi \...

well, everything. sufficient knowledge so that I may say I know "periodic functions theory"... but, I was somewhat afraid of that... it seems I'll have to dig through the library for what I need. Thank you for your input. :] I already covered Fourier series last year. I was wondering if...

Hello, I know I am asking for advice about a very specific topic - periodic functions, almost periodic functions and quasi-periodic functions. I was hit by an idea and I need to know a few things more comprehensively about this topic !?~ :] I am aware that "periodic functions etc." isn't a...

thanks a lot for these examples. after looking into them, from here to there, I eventually found that maybe analytic number theory or something similar is more "suitable" for me. an idiot as I was I didn't think of approaching number theory as from other domains; that would've helped a lot and...

Speaking of Number Theory. It's one of the courses I have to take but I simply loathe. I already flunked it because I couldn't get motivated enough to study for it. How does one find the necessary excitement for it, what are some interesting results in number theory? And by interesting I mean...

You have a typo on the third line: it's supposed to be "(¬P V ¬Q) V R" and then by DeMorgan's rule you get the 4th line ¬(P ∧ Q) V R. Maybe that was bothering you? As for the intuitiveness of it. Think about when any of (P -> R) V (Q -> R) and (P ∧ Q) -> R are false: only when both P and Q are...

haha... :) you'll never learn anything about philosophy from books. you'll learn a great deal about the history of philosophy though. just go to a local library and pick a random book from the philosophy section. they usually have all the "classical" stuff you mentioned, and maybe even more...

I'm not a compatibilist but I'll join in anyway. It seems that you're implicitly making assumptions that you never really state or clarify. What is physical law? "Law"? The notion of "natural/physical law" as I see it is a remnant from a few centuries ago that has no place in science yet is...

Hello, All the results are standard stuff and you can find them in most real analysis textbooks. A specific example... well you can find them in Robert G. Bartle's, https://www.amazon.com/dp/047105464X/?tag=pfamazon01-20. Sorry, I don't know any online material for them but I think you can...

but going that way, that vector equation "is" a straight line if we draw it in a system formed by some perpendicular "straight" lines... like I said, using algebraic geometry seems a little like going in circles to me... that equation doesn't characterize straightness, only some abstract...

that limit is elegantly proved using the series definition of the sin function. no need for that inequality.

can you upload that image to imageshack or something? I'd like to see it and it's saying "pending attachment aproval" on my end... :(