this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
317 points (98.5% liked)

Science Memes

10923 readers
1692 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There's notation for that - (x0 - δ, x0 + δ), so you could say
f(x0 - δ, x0 + δ) ⊂ (L - ε, L + ε)

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

that would be a lot clearer. i’ve just been burned in the past by notation in analysis.

my two most painful memories are:

  • in the (baby) rudin textbook, he uses f(x+) to denote the limit of _f _from the right, and f(x-) to denote the limit of f from the left.
  • in friedman analysis textbook, he writes the direct sum of vector spaces as M + N instead of using the standard notation M ⊕ N. to make matters worse, he uses M ⊕ N to mean M is orthogonal to N.

there’s the usual “null spaces” instead of “kernel” nonsense. ive also seen lots of analysis books use the → symbol to define functions when they really should have been using the ↦ symbol.

at this point, i wouldn’t put anything past them.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Egregious. I feel your pain.