41
NSFW: I am a trans girl who is drunk and high at the same time, AMA!
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
41 points (58.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43940 readers
518 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I had to look up "nerd sniping", I've been there. If it makes you feel any better, the Generalized Stokes' Theorem has a proof, e.g. it is a solved problem, it just requires a lot of reading.
I flipped through a few books in my e-library and found that Manifolds, Tensors, And Forms by Paul Renteln has two equivalent proofs starting on pg. 164. That was the "soonest" I could find the proof appearing in the books I know have a proof, e.g. building on the least material. IMO it's an "easy" book compared to other books I've read on manifolds and differential forms. There's a copy on LibGen.
Dammit now I want to go read my books :)