@Workable Goblin
I wish I could tell ya what they meant, lol. My knowledge of physics isn’t quite as strong. But hey, it looks fancy so it gets the job done, right? X3
I recognize the truth table and the various purely mathematical definitions, but I can’t work out where the physics equations in the third panel are coming from. I recognize that they involve electrical and magnetic fields (and density, for some reason), but they don’t remotely match Maxwell’s Equestions, which would be the obvious source.
@Background Pony #8738
That’s not quite true. There are genuine, documented examples of mathematical prodigies who take to the subject like fish to water; see Terence Tao for a recent example or Srinivasa Ramanujan for a somewhat more distant one. But those are exceptional cases…
@byte[]
Yeppers! It’s a truth table defining conjunction and disjunction. Thought I’d include some formal logic ^^ Also, I did not write that seemingly inconsistent portion myself, lol
If anyone is curious, I typed out the following: the set of primes, the set of rational numbers, the imaginary unit, the Gamma function, Euler’s identity, a truth table, and a couple things involving the Zeta function.
@Background Pony #8738
Not to mention that passion/interest can play a big role, too. Makes me think of how Einstein said, “I have no special talents, I am only passionately curious.”
@Spectral Bolt
Science has actually proven that more often than not the limiting factor (a word I’m very fond of) happens to be the efficacy of teaching and lack of good pedagogical training, not one’s ability for math or even how quickly you learn. There is no such thing as a math person either. There are explanations for why some excel better at math than others but intellectual talent is not it.
