|
How many letters?
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: How many letters?
Ok, I am not sure what you mean by that but I was wondering the number of ATPs he burnt while typing that equation which as I see isn't really needed. 
Whether I think I can, or think I can't, I am always bloody right!
|
|
|
|
|
Agent__007 wrote: I am not sure what you mean by that
It's a reference to his CCC posts.
Agent__007 wrote: I was wondering the number of ATPs he burnt while typing that equation
Regrettably, not a lot: https://what-if.xkcd.com/102/[^]
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
There are some that would not know what I was trying to do, and a visual example may have helped.
Not everyone here will have done calculus.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
And for some of us, it has been... too long to remember or want to remember.
I've used other areas (trig, geometry), but have not had to use calculus in my working career.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Not everyone here will have done calculus.
And we're glad of that.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Not everyone here will have done calculus.
True, poor buggers. They're the ones who still think math is hard.
No lie; all through algebra, geometry and trig I struggled, memorizing random facts and never getting why they worked (many of them, at least). Then I took calculus and all became clear. Perhaps we should start kids with differential and integral calculus, then lead them into the specialty maths. It would be easier, in some ways.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Spreadsheets are not supposed to do symbolic math. There are many CAS[^] available, however.
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
Or Wolfram Alpha[^]
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
True.
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, that is Most Helpful!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Clicky[^]
All I need to know in one easy click!
Carlo, you da bomb!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
On a side note: do you really need a tool to compute a symbolic derivative? 
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
Not for my job, but I am starting another degree in October.
Part of the course is Hard Sums.
("Investigative and Mathematical Skill in Science" followed by "Essential Mathematics" then "Mathematical Methods")
I will need as much assistance as possible as I am attempting 90 Credits in the first year, quite a lot for a part time course.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I was suggesting you could do it yourself (without using tools, you know, just pencil & paper...).
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
Not the plotting, it would have taken too long without the assistance of people like you pointing me to the right place!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
It indeed appears that Excel cannot produce derivatives! I poured crude oil all over my keyboard and didn't get petrol. Excel team should fix this immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
Mladen Janković wrote: Excel team should fix this immediately.
The Exxon team was working on this problem, but...
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
\ /
\ /
\ /
\/
/\
/ \
/ \
/ \
Solution to your problem:
1) Enlarge target above
2) Print out enlarged image
3) Lay on solid flat surface
4) Bang head on target
5) Repeat step 4 until problem solved.
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave, that is EXACTLY what I need.
I see that it is a workaround, and that Excel has no Calculus functions per se, so it at least can be done for plotting.
The derivatives are easy enough, mental arithmetic really, but it would have been nice just to pump in a function and have it all done for me.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
That was my first google search and first result I clicked...
My Google Foo must be working today then...... 
|
|
|
|
|
Your other option is to use an add-in[^] with the feature built-in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
