|
Lol If you differentiate Bruce Wayne you get Batman.
|
|
lolz. forgot the +c
|
|
he actually does need a constant during the use of the fundamental theorem of calculus although in the final answer he could be construed as a correct since the constants cancel we are not using numbers therefore he would need to show the subtraction of the variable constants(ensuring no loss of data due to imaginary numbers)
|
|
he didn't have to use calculus to prove batman is bruce wayne, I'm sure simple algebra would have sufficed.
|
|
Did this on my calc test, actually got a point for it.
|
|
I don't see a fucking constant.
|
|
shut the fuck up with that constant shit nobody fuckin needs to know, knowing how to draw batman is more important!
|
|
This is absolutely amazing.
|
|
yeah
wrong anyway lol
if you differentiate batman with respect to bat you'll get bruce wayne
if you integrate batman with respect to bat you'd get (bat)^2(man)
can tell why this person failed
|
|
I guess the derivative of Clark Kent is batman, then.
|
|
The fact that he didn't add a constant of integration is fine. The problem is that the limits of the integration, 0 and bat, must both be constants, else it cannot be a definite integral. You cannot integrate with respect to a constant, you must do it with respect to a variable. So 'bat' is ambiguously, and mathematically incorrectly, used as both a constant and a variable.
Batman, you wily chap.
|
|
it's? its.
|
|
it's? its.
|
|
That would equal one
|
|
He can't use the same variable in the limit and in the measure, that just doesn't make sense. What an idiot.
|
|
it's? its.
|
|
me too...
|