Recent content by xorbie

a confidence level always has a significance level associated with it, so no.

Ok, basically I'm clearly being an idiot today. I've just not been thinking this through. The first three terms of the correct Tayler series expansion for z^i about z = 1+i should be (I hope) something along the lines of: f(z) = e^{i Log(i+1)} + i (1+i)^{-1} e^{i Log(i+1)} (z-1-i) + i (i-1)...

Firstly, I made a mistake in my OP. It should be at z = 1 + i, but that shouldn't make a huge difference. The problem is that terms such as (z)^i aren't allowed. We need to restate them as e^i Log(z). So in your last line, it would have to be: f(z) = e^{i Log(i))} + i e^{i Log(i)} (z- i- 1)...

I need to find the first three terms of this series. Am I correct in saying z^i = exp(i*Log(z)), then using the taylor series for e^z, giving me: (i*Log(z)) - 1/2*(Log(z))^2 - i/6*(Log(z))^3 + 1/24*(Log(z))^4 + ... I haven't worked it out, but this seems to mean that the coefficients...

Actually, AFAIK it doesn't have to be a bunch of isolated points. For example, a function that is differentiable on a line (or finite union of lines) is not analytic anywhere, because the lines do not form a domain. Basically, yeah. You can analyze the problem by switching from Arg(z) to...

If you want to start from first principles, let the limit equal L. Then just show that there exists an epsilon, such that that there is no N: n>N --> | f(n) - L | < epsilon

Can't recommend this enough myself. Try to take as many classes that emphasize and utilize proofs, both the lecturer him (or her) self, as well as in homework assignments.

I'm still in college now, so I can only give you info on the first couple years. In high school, I took our AP math sequence, which covered basic set theory, probability, trig, algebra and ended in a full year of calculus, which was pretty advanced for a high school class (covered epsilon...

Wow. I'm taking 16 credits and I do maybe 15 or 18 hours of course work a week.

I have some friends there, and friends with friends there. It's not a pleasent picture. Of course, that all depends on how much work you do now. I go to a pretty good school, but I don't do nearly as much work (I don't think) here, as I would have to at MIT. I applied there, and in retrospect...

Random guess: Pi? e? Root two/six/ten?[/color]

That's what I was thinking, thanks.

I think what he's saying is that the transformation is: First and last letter stay the same, but middle letters can be scrambled randomly. Which numbers are unaltered?

I don't actually know any number theory, but I think I've figured out how, generally speaking, to do this. At any rate, I'm fairly sure that N=256 for 2 weighings (and I know for certain I can get 256). The method I'm using (at least tell me if I'm on the right track): There are 64...

there are many more if you aren't going to break syllables.