this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
464 points (98.7% liked)

Science Memes

15648 readers
2817 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The thing is that it's legit a fraction and d/dx actually explains what's going on under the hood. People interact with it as an operator because it's mostly looking up common derivatives and using the properties.

Take for example ∫f(x) dx to mean "the sum (∫) of supersmall sections of x (dx) multiplied by the value of x at that point ( f(x) ). This is why there's dx at the end of all integrals.

The same way you can say that the slope at x is tiny f(x) divided by tiny x or d*f(x) / dx or more traditionally (d/dx) * f(x).

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The other thing is that it's legit not a fraction.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

it's legit a fraction, just the numerator and denominator aren't numbers.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

try this on -- Yes 👎

It's a fraction of two infinitesimals. Infinitesimals aren't numbers, however, they have their own algebra and can be manipulated algebraically. It so happens that a fraction of two infinitesimals behaves as a derivative.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Ok, but no. Infinitesimal-based foundations for calculus aren't standard and if you try to make this work with differential forms you'll get a convoluted mess that is far less elegant than the actual definitions. It's just not founded on actual math. It's hard for me to argue this with you because it comes down to simply not knowing the definition of a basic concept or having the necessary context to understand why that definition is used instead of others...

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why would you assume I don't have the context? I have a degree in math. I could be wrong about this, I'm open-minded. By all means, please explain how infinitesimals don't have a consistent algebra.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago
  1. I also have a masters in math and completed all coursework for a PhD. Infinitesimals never came up because they're not part of standard foundations for analysis. I'd be shocked if they were addressed in any formal capacity in your curriculum, because why would they be? It can be useful to think in terms of infinitesimals for intuition but you should know the difference between intuition and formalism.

  2. I didn't say "infinitesimals don't have a consistent algebra." I'm familiar with NSA and other systems admitting infinitesimal-like objects. I said they're not standard. They aren't.

  3. If you want to use differential forms to define 1D calculus, rather than a NSA/infinitesimal approach, you'll eventually realize some of your definitions are circular, since differential forms themselves are defined with an implicit understanding of basic calculus. You can get around this circular dependence but only by introducing new definitions that are ultimately less elegant than the standard limit-based ones.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

1/2 <-- not a number. Two numbers and an operator. But also a number.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

In Comp-Sci, operators mean stuff like >>, *, /, + and so on. But in math, an operator is a (possibly symbollic) function, such as a derivative or matrix.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Youre not wrong, distinctively, but even in mathematics "/" is considered an operator.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_(mathematics)

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

oh huh, neat. Always though of those as "operations."

[–] socsa@piefed.social 3 points 6 days ago

The world has finite precision. dx isn't a limit towards zero, it is a limit towards the smallest numerical non-zero. For physics, that's Planck, for engineers it's the least significant bit/figure. All of calculus can be generalized to arbitrary precision, and it's called discrete math. So not even mathematicians agree on this topic.

[–] someacnt@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

But df/dx is a fraction, is a ratio between differential of f and standard differential of x. They both live in the tangent space TR, which is isomorphic to R.

What's not fraction is \partial f / \partial x, but likely you already know that. This is akin to how you cannot divide two vectors.

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 2 points 6 days ago

We teach kids the derive operator being ' or ·. Then we switch to that writing which makes sense when you can use it properly enough it behaves like a fraction

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago
[–] voodooattack@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Software engineer: 🫦

[–] chortle_tortle@mander.xyz 90 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Mathematicians will in one breath tell you they aren't fractions, then in the next tell you dz/dx = dz/dy * dy/dx

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Not very good mathematicians if they tell you they aren't fractions.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 81 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I found math in physics to have this really fun duality of "these are rigorous rules that must be followed" and "if we make a set of edge case assumptions, we can fit the square peg in the round hole"

Also I will always treat the derivative operator as a fraction

[–] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 64 points 1 week ago (11 children)

2+2 = 5

…for sufficiently large values of 2

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 week ago

i was in a math class once where a physics major treated a particular variable as one because at csmic scale the value of the variable basically doesn't matter. the math professor both was and wasn't amused

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio 68 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Derivatives started making more sense to me after I started learning their practical applications in physics class. d/dx was too abstract when learning it in precalc, but once physics introduced d/dt (change with respect to time t), it made derivative formulas feel more intuitive, like "velocity is the change in position with respect to time, which the derivative of position" and "acceleration is the change in velocity with respect to time, which is the derivative of velocity"

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 35 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Possibly you just had to hear it more than once.

I learned it the other way around since my physics teacher was speedrunning the math sections to get to the fun physics stuff and I really got it after hearing it the second time in math class.

But yeah: it often helps to have practical examples and it doesn't get any more applicable to real life than d/dt.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vaionko@sopuli.xyz 42 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Except you can kinda treat it as a fraction when dealing with differential equations

[–] socsa@piefed.social 2 points 6 days ago

And discrete math.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 1 week ago

Oh god this comment just gave me ptsd

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] callyral@pawb.social 25 points 1 week ago

clearly, d/dx simplifies to 1/x

[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not even a fraction, you can just cancel out the two "d"s

[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 34 points 1 week ago

"d"s nuts lmao

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)

Look it is so simple, it just acts on an uncountably infinite dimensional vector space of differentiable functions.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›