I’ve never seen this notation, but to dispute its fairness I suppose you’d have to establish whether the textbook or study material introduced the notation.
Accepting the notation for the moment, how does this change one’s interpretation of the solution snippet posted earlier?
Based on the solution snippet, your and Dr. Claude's first reaction seems right. There is some confusion about the notation ##\ln{x}##, which already implies "log to the base ##e##", making the subscript in ##\ln_e{x}## redundant.
However if you can overlook the weird notation and pretend that...
If we can agree that your claims are irrelevant to this thread, then I agree that any conflict with your claims is also irrelevant.
What is more relevant is what did the teacher mean when writing the problem? And what's the claimed solution?
No idea what is the "most frequently used" notation for that particular function.
How is that relevant to whether the representation of the number is important in numerical analysis?
Most research papers, lecture notes or even scribbles on a blackboard (or napkin) that I've seen will, after dealing with some particular thing more than a couple or three times, either adopt some existing notation or invent a new one purely out of convenience. (See for example fresh_42's list...
I think YouAreAwesome is saying the "to the base e" and "to the base 2" play the "same parts of speech" in the expression and hence conflict with one another. At least that's how I read it.
The code seems to mix and match the traditional C/FORTRAN programming style (inner and outer loops with accumulation) with Matlab (vector products), so you may be confusing yourself there.If you want to do it the traditional way then you want to calculate the product a = x(m)*w at every step of...
Covering every (square) inch of the seafloor with depth soundings is itself a huge achievement. It doesn't have to mean mapping every inch individually.
I'm also going with ANSWER2, which seems correct to within rounding error. There is a geometric argument that allows the calculations to be simplified greatly(?), but I am curious to see the method that was submitted with ANSWER2.
One way to think about this problem is to look at the plan view.
If the normal vector to plane ABQP is -2i - j + 3k, what does that normal vector look like in the plan view?
What does the normal vector to CDPQ look like in the plan view? How that vector relate to the previous normal vector you...
I asked because thought it might be instructive for the OP to walk us through his or her thinking.
From a mathematics perspective the solution is not incorrect. You have an unknown and a collection of equations to choose from. If you can find one that relates the unknown to the knowns and you...
The answer is correct, but the steps you show have some issues.
Why are you solving for d in the first place? The question asks for t, not d.
In the second step, why are you setting d = 0?