Member since May 2, 2012

# uvosky

My Profile
• Posts: 77
• Location:
• Occupation:
I JUST LOVE TO DO M A T H E M A T I C S
Following
User has not yet added friends.
Followers
User does not yet have followers.
My Tags
Mathematics, Calculus, Algebra, Number Theory, Puzzle, Physics
My Recent Posts

Thu 22 Nov, 2012 03:35 am - That's an wonderful method ! Nicely done , nicely done. (view)
Thu 11 Oct, 2012 04:59 am - Well , the numerical difference between our results is due to the fact that on the first hand you gave an approx. mean , it should be (51/49)+57 which is not exactly 58.04 . Base change is a term... (view)
Wed 10 Oct, 2012 11:10 pm - You might wanna try by changing the base of the variable by writing the new variables as y = x - 57 , so that the new mean is mean(y)= mean(x) - 57... (view)
Fri 5 Oct, 2012 02:42 am - I was out of touch from the forum for some time so noticed your reply lately; thanks very much for the ribbon , and about the general integral you mentioned I have some simple results for... (view)
Fri 14 Sep, 2012 04:08 am - Calculation of load of track ... etc. are not the main headaches of physics. Some of the many theories of mechanics or in broader sense of gravity are:-... (view)
Fri 14 Sep, 2012 03:59 am - As far as I know of historical matters Newton himself derived mv^2/r . What I am trying to show is that Newtonian mechanics is inconsistent when dealing with... (view)
Fri 14 Sep, 2012 02:28 am - I would proceed by thus , let y = (sec x)^2 then dy = 2 secx secx tanx dx = 2 ( sec x)^2 tanx dx so, 2 (tanx)^2 (sec x)^2 dx... (view)
Fri 14 Sep, 2012 12:53 am - Hm; I know that's a trivial upper bound , am looking for a better approximation , without an infinite series of course . (view)
Fri 14 Sep, 2012 12:35 am - By considering force components what I find is , ( P / v ) - kMg - Mg sin b = Mf , whence P = Mv ( gk + g sinb + f ) (view)
Thu 13 Sep, 2012 11:57 pm - ∞ ∫ x^(-x) d x , approximate this integral. 2 (view)

1. Forums
2. » uvosky