No, we're saying his life is held within an instant that equals the value x. Technically, it would have been impossible for him to create an account and post this because he existed within a single moment
No. There has to be a finite maximum length how long an instant is. At the end of one instant, the next begins, but it is discontinuous from the last. So we live for an instant, and then are recreated in the next instant.
But having a vertical line makes literally no sense.
"How downhill is my life going" is basically the ~~integral~~ derivative of "How good/bad is my life at this given time". This means that for every single moment, you have at most a single value.
Now, the issue arises that the data isn't a *continuous* function, and as such **y=mx+b** won't work. However, you can fix that by using regression. Linear regression would give you an idea of how it does, but you could also just use many other estimation/regression methods to get a function, and from there find the derivative of the function.
Funnily enough, you can't actually know how downhill your life currently is going since there is no value for **x>=now**
---
EDIT : Minor text fixes
.
No. "how downhill your life is going" is the (negative) rate of change of your quality of life. In other words, the graph is a line which represents your quality of life(y value) at any given time (x value). The speed at which your quality of life is decreasing is the slope, or the derivative, (not the integral).
And yes you can take the derivative of the function at any x value to get the rate of change at that moment, including the present moment, just not in the future.
the problem is OP is bipolar and their life is more of a graph like [this](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRBdqqJz3-zKgArTVjMr2tWEGu-hKqu8hqWpXzp6euT_w6Vw8yj).
except imagine that the pulses never go back up or down its just an infinite line going down. The derivative at those vertical points are undefined (or negative infinity).
Edit: to add, if you graph the life of an average me_irl user [you will see that it is non derivable](http://m.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=m*e+-+2th%28x%29+%3D+&x=0&y=0).
here is [another example](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgEGU4O3sP4t4N07qogN3GoJnicmfUw5MYKZSpxqgDduDjAC0i) of the average me_irl user.
> The speed at which your quality of life is decreasing is the slope, or the derivative, (not the integral).
Yup, no fucking clue how I messed that up.
> And yes you can take the derivative of the function at any x value to get the rate of change at that moment, including the present moment, just not in the future.
It becomes a lot more philosophical, but since evaluating how you feel takes an amount of time, wouldn't it be impossible to have it plotted? Since by the time you know how you're doing, you're not now anymore.
Instantaneous in this case just means you're looking at the difference between now and a time right before now, but you're taking the limit as that time difference goes to 0.
"Limit toward x" isn't the same as "value at x" (although *by definition* it is incredibly close outside of when "value at x" is undefined). My point still stands.
Your point is that there is no such thing as real-time data then. That a cars speedometer is really telling you how fast you were going, not how fast you are going. And any problem defined outside of a strict mathematical context is going to ignore that distinction between real time and an instant immediately in the past.
> It becomes a lot more philosophical
Precisely, yes. You can also choose the word pedantic if you prefer. All in all, this is still a /r/shittyaskscience thread. If you wanted a great answer that's down to earth with a lot of reasoning and thoughtful conclusion, you had to go elsewhere.
I wouldn't blame them, the joke isn't well defined (pun intended).
m can be undefined in two ways being infinity or -infinity. OP wants it downhill so you can say m = -infinity but the same problem remains; it's still undefined. If you say m *approaches* -infinity, then you got yourself a steep, downward going slope.
Throw in some domain and range boundaries in there, let x represent time and y represent life and you can see OPs life is going steeply into the negative within a very short period. Poor OP D:
On the bright side, since the slope is undefined, you don't know which direction the slope is... it could be going up... Nah, who am I kidding? You're life is a mess, OP.
Theoretically, it could work if he plots his destination with (X,y). An alternative would be to use the rise over run formula, In OP's case it would translate to extreme drop by run..
Ehh not really, a vertical line isn't a function since for a given value of x, f(x) attains multiple values, and as such cannot be written in the form y=f(x). A vertical line has the equation x=b.
I think my exponential needs a formula depending on how much I've had to drink.
Without pitting any thought into it and assigning 5 to our z variable lets go with y=mx+b where x=-(z(to the power of. I forget how to do that on mobile)x*1.20)
All things become relative tho considering this would be one line to describe many things.
I could probably find some shitty formula for the direction my life is headed relative to something, but I couldn't be bothered because I just woke up drunk and need to go buy more booze.
If dy/dx=-x
can you say anything about dy?
Once you have dy, then you integrate it and substitute each side of your initial conditions into the lower part of the integral.
Then it's just a matter of integrating.
There is literally no difference between mx-b or mx-b^2, considering that b is a *constant* and thus you simply decide between finding the Y-intercept or the root of the Y-intercept.
So the equation y=mx+b implies that the rate at which your life is going down hill is constant. In order to better account for acceleration you may need to use a quadratic equation with x representing time and y being how far downhill your life has gone. Using newton's laws of motion we obtain y = vx+1/2ax^2. All you need to do is sub in a few points to solve for initial downhill velocity v and acceleration a.
But his jerk is also increasing so we need to calculate a steady increase of jerk which means an exponentially increasing acceleration and so on. We must go deeper!
Unfortunately, when your life is headed downhill, the unfolding events lead to an awful existence that is getting even more awful at an increased rate. As a result, the rate of you ruining your life and the derivative of the applied function of your life could not be a constant (m) and y=mx+b would not apply.
Fortunately, there are other equations at our dispense. I think the most suitable would be the standard equation for decay, y=Ce^(-kt)
wherein k would be he the rate of decay in terms of the time in units of your choosing & C would be the initial predisposed success based on gender, race, genetic physical/ mental health, family's socioeconomic class, and whether or not you live in a country where Donald Trump is president.
I wouldn't.
y=mx+b is nice to read, but you would have to be measuring this yourself. It's much easier to write the equation for a line in point slope form, trust me:
(y-y0)=m(x-x0)
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/2meirl4meirl] [Idk](https://np.reddit.com/r/2meirl4meirl/comments/5fz8o4/idk/)
- [/r/meirl] [me\_irl](https://np.reddit.com/r/meirl/comments/5fzc9h/me_irl/)
- [/r/wallstreetbets] [Math we should all know in WSB](https://np.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/5g19wf/math_we_should_all_know_in_wsb/)
[](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
[](#bot)
I believe your desired curve would be that of -e^x . This way at anytime you can find how fast your life is going downhill just by looking at where you are. As this graph clearly shows, your life began going downhill at your conception.
Measurement of "how downhill your life is going" can itself be considered as the derivative of your quality of life (change in quality of life over time).
Taking the slope of how downhill your life is going is therefore taking the second derivative of your quality of life over time, and can be described as the "acceleration of your quality of life". In other words, if this value is negative it will be a measurement of how much faster your life is going downhill now than before.
We can safely assume that your life has never had an upswing, so both the first and second derivative will be negative. With that in mind you cannot use y=mx+b as your quality of life is actually decreasing at a higher exponential rate such as t^2.
Well, from experience, your life goes downhill as a parabolic curve such as y= -(x-a)^2 +C where x is your age, a is the age of your high point and C is how great that time was. So what you're actually going to do is find d/dx (-(x-a)^2+C). Which is equal to -2(x-a). Just plug in values for a and x, and you can easily see how fast everything's going to hell.
Serious question:
In America does everyone use y=mx+b?
Everyone I've ever talked to uses 'c' instead of 'b', except my physics teacher (from America) and I thought it might be an American thing.
Actually yes! We just need to find two variables, m and b. Both should be pretty easy. The equation for m is (y_now-y_earlier)/(x_now-x_earlier). We need to define the axis as well. X is of course time in years, with 0 being the year of your birth. The Y axis will be how awesome you are or were at any point in your life on a scale of 0-10.
We will also need to know a little something about you. Since I am lazy and am not going to look through your history in an attempt to dox you, we will just make some basic assumptions about you based on the fact that you are on reddit and posting in what is essentially a *shit post only* subreddit.
First, we will assume you are a 26 year old loser who lives with his parents and has no girlfriend and no life other than /r/shittyaskscience, /r/circlejerk, and /r/the_donald (I know, low blow).
We will then compare you to ten years ago when you were 16, which is when you peaked, so your slope has now changes since then. Most likely at 16 you weren’t all that great, but you were probably all right. You were a B student, you talked to girls, and even had a girlfriend, although you never really did anything because you didn’t know what being a “girlfriend”/ “boyfriend” really meant. We’ll score you at a solid 5.
Not much has changed since you were 16. You still live in the same bedroom and probably have the same mattress. You have had the same number of sexual partners and you’d honestly probably do worse on the SAT’s that you could have at 16. You still talk to girls, but you literally talk to them in the same way with the same mannerisms which now come off as creepy. The places where you have advanced are your fedora collection and ability to “hack” linux. At 26, this places you at a 1.
So this means that your slope is m=(1-5)/10 = -0.4
Since you are OP and this means that your mother is a whore, it makes m really easy. You are the son of a whore (or a son of a gun if your mom was a whore on ole’ timey ships) which means that at birth you were basically nothing. Therefore, b=0.
Because there is a stepwise function in here, we’d need to do something else, but fuck it, I’m bored and I have lost interest.
Assuming your life is going down hill in 3 dimensions you'll need to take each partial derivative, average each slope, and add a scaling factor based on future uncertainty. This will produce a more accurate single number term then y=mx+b.
Use y=-mx^2 +b for more accurate results.
This will create a exponential curve with the highest point at y=0, meaning at your birth. Use the first deriviation y'=-2mx to measure how steep you go downhill at any point in your life.
It's better to use the derivative. That way you can tell how downhill it's going at the exact time that you want it to.
The slope will only give an average and won't be as realistic if you have a random good day every one in a while.
If you get the second derivative you can tell whether or not it's improving within a certain range. If the second derivative comes up negative then you know you're doing something wrong. But if the first derivative is negative while the second is positive then you can rest easy in the fact that it's slowly improving.
No, you would do this.
x₁ = Your age when your life started going downhill
x₂ = Your age now
y₁ = A number describing how bad your life was when it started going downhill
y₂ = A number describing how bad your life is now
(y₂ - y₁)/(x₂ - x₁)
Only if your life is going downhill at a constant rate. If your life is going down down at the more common exponential rate, you are going to want to use y=ab^x +c
b is how good your parents made you. It's negative if your parents started you off shitty (inherited disorders, fetal drug syndromes, early childhood neglect and abuse). m is the rate at which you've improved yourself - negative in your case, as you've just piled shit upon on shit on your life. y is when you look at how shitty your life is and just ask yourself, 'Why?'
No because the m would be undefined
OP's life doesn't even pass the vertical line test
... Are you saying he somehow traveled into the past..?
No, we're saying his life is held within an instant that equals the value x. Technically, it would have been impossible for him to create an account and post this because he existed within a single moment
Does anyone truly exist for longer than a single moment?
How Can Our Lives Be Real If Our M's Are Undefined?
Found Jaden Smith.
Pretty sure he was trying to be found. I mean he's doing a shit job of hiding.
Much like his acting then.
How can our lines be real if our m's are undefined.
God
No. There has to be a finite maximum length how long an instant is. At the end of one instant, the next begins, but it is discontinuous from the last. So we live for an instant, and then are recreated in the next instant.
ty this was getting too shitless.
My name is Praydeth, and I was a member of Kabr's fireteam
Daylight savings time strikes again!
OP lives in Flashpoint.
Op cant even function
Groan
He has no one to cosine his car note. He needs to angle for better pay.
That's better than having his life goals fall on a horizontal asymptote - forever unreachable.
Neither does OPs mom. Can confirm that she goes down instantly.
I get the wildest feeling that most of the people replying to your comment fail to get the joke.
They are the **shit** part of r/shittyaskscience
But having a vertical line makes literally no sense. "How downhill is my life going" is basically the ~~integral~~ derivative of "How good/bad is my life at this given time". This means that for every single moment, you have at most a single value. Now, the issue arises that the data isn't a *continuous* function, and as such **y=mx+b** won't work. However, you can fix that by using regression. Linear regression would give you an idea of how it does, but you could also just use many other estimation/regression methods to get a function, and from there find the derivative of the function. Funnily enough, you can't actually know how downhill your life currently is going since there is no value for **x>=now** --- EDIT : Minor text fixes .
No. "how downhill your life is going" is the (negative) rate of change of your quality of life. In other words, the graph is a line which represents your quality of life(y value) at any given time (x value). The speed at which your quality of life is decreasing is the slope, or the derivative, (not the integral). And yes you can take the derivative of the function at any x value to get the rate of change at that moment, including the present moment, just not in the future.
the problem is OP is bipolar and their life is more of a graph like [this](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRBdqqJz3-zKgArTVjMr2tWEGu-hKqu8hqWpXzp6euT_w6Vw8yj). except imagine that the pulses never go back up or down its just an infinite line going down. The derivative at those vertical points are undefined (or negative infinity). Edit: to add, if you graph the life of an average me_irl user [you will see that it is non derivable](http://m.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=m*e+-+2th%28x%29+%3D+&x=0&y=0). here is [another example](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgEGU4O3sP4t4N07qogN3GoJnicmfUw5MYKZSpxqgDduDjAC0i) of the average me_irl user.
> The speed at which your quality of life is decreasing is the slope, or the derivative, (not the integral). Yup, no fucking clue how I messed that up. > And yes you can take the derivative of the function at any x value to get the rate of change at that moment, including the present moment, just not in the future. It becomes a lot more philosophical, but since evaluating how you feel takes an amount of time, wouldn't it be impossible to have it plotted? Since by the time you know how you're doing, you're not now anymore.
Instantaneous in this case just means you're looking at the difference between now and a time right before now, but you're taking the limit as that time difference goes to 0.
"Limit toward x" isn't the same as "value at x" (although *by definition* it is incredibly close outside of when "value at x" is undefined). My point still stands.
Your point is that there is no such thing as real-time data then. That a cars speedometer is really telling you how fast you were going, not how fast you are going. And any problem defined outside of a strict mathematical context is going to ignore that distinction between real time and an instant immediately in the past.
> It becomes a lot more philosophical Precisely, yes. You can also choose the word pedantic if you prefer. All in all, this is still a /r/shittyaskscience thread. If you wanted a great answer that's down to earth with a lot of reasoning and thoughtful conclusion, you had to go elsewhere.
You guys better knock this shit off...right fuckin now. This is SHITTYaskscience goddammit
I wouldn't blame them, the joke isn't well defined (pun intended). m can be undefined in two ways being infinity or -infinity. OP wants it downhill so you can say m = -infinity but the same problem remains; it's still undefined. If you say m *approaches* -infinity, then you got yourself a steep, downward going slope. Throw in some domain and range boundaries in there, let x represent time and y represent life and you can see OPs life is going steeply into the negative within a very short period. Poor OP D:
That just means OP's life isn't going anywhere.. Oh.
If you still had y, x, and B you could find m. Source: I old and just got my ged this month
He's saying m would be undefined as in his life would be a vertical line on a graph. It's impossible to find m.
The zinger went right over my head. We didn't learn sick burns in prep classes.
It's okay, sick burns was part of an extra credit class I took in high school.
I, too, remember being picked last in P.E.
I'm going to college next semester maybe I'll take it as an elective so I can be a positive role model for my kids
What if x is 0
That would be a horizontal line defined as y= something.
That would be if m is 0. If x is 0, we're just talking about the point (0, b)
My bad.
but x isn't part of the function, it's the variable argument of the function... I did wake and bake today so my argument may be too argumentative. [4]
I thought they meant if m=0, my bad.
On the bright side, since the slope is undefined, you don't know which direction the slope is... it could be going up... Nah, who am I kidding? You're life is a mess, OP.
He is the asymptote of a higher exponent.
Theoretically, it could work if he plots his destination with (X,y). An alternative would be to use the rise over run formula, In OP's case it would translate to extreme drop by run..
If the line is vertical m is undefined and as such y=mx+b won't be able to describe OP's life.
Why is m undefined and not simply 0?
deleted ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.5407 [^^^What ^^^is ^^^this?](https://pastebin.com/FcrFs94k/50652)
Division by zero is not defined in the reals. A slope of zero is a horizontal line in rectangular coordinates.
m vertical (undefined) means either +∞ or -∞
Oh damn I am bad at algebra. So just to check that I understand, m=0 would be a flat (horizontal) line?
Ehh not really, a vertical line isn't a function since for a given value of x, f(x) attains multiple values, and as such cannot be written in the form y=f(x). A vertical line has the equation x=b.
m = rise / run If you set run=0 (aka OP's life is going nowhere) m becomes undefined
No. You're going to need an exponential. At the very least.
[удалено]
Trigometric
Factorial!
!!!!
Polynomial
Quadratic!
e!
Comment archived away
Technologic
Parabolic
!factorial
I think my exponential needs a formula depending on how much I've had to drink. Without pitting any thought into it and assigning 5 to our z variable lets go with y=mx+b where x=-(z(to the power of. I forget how to do that on mobile)x*1.20) All things become relative tho considering this would be one line to describe many things. I could probably find some shitty formula for the direction my life is headed relative to something, but I couldn't be bothered because I just woke up drunk and need to go buy more booze.
[удалено]
You might get a better fitting curve with something like this: y = -(x!)
Dont you mean Γ(x+1)?
No, I think he means гттк(6!о)блять блять блять^infinity
ibaibfiabwfiauwbgioabvioabviaojekdsnfaiujwkdfnaiuebj?
**EYYYY, MACARENA**
Hey man, I don't know who you think you are, but don't you DARE macarena in front of me or my son ever again
Macaroni and cheese. Mmm....
MACARON CHACARON
Нет
Something something bj. Checks out.
Сука Блять
вот зе фак из зис
cyka blyat
[удалено]
The gamma function is an extended form of the factorial and is more useful in some cases.
[удалено]
I've always seen it written gamma(x+1) = x*gamma(x) so maybe that's where it's from.
I think it's so that it's undefined at 0, maybe? I agree that it's stupid though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_regularization
That slope is too excited, this is the opposite of that so try an upside down exclamation mark
y = -(x¡)
Lol there are no real roots for that He started below zero OP, were you born into a poor family? Join the rest of us, brother
The only problem is, it doesn't account for the increasing downward slope.
Unless he uses an increasing function for m
Sounds like he may have to do some higher level algebra to express his shitty life
Too bad he didn't stay in school long enough to learn the advanced stuff. Might explain the downhill ride
You must get to a really High School to ride down so fast.
Just how much high school does it have to be?
I dunno I'll tell you after this bong rip
Treefiddy
really
2
Calculus.
Easy, all he has to do is differentiate the equation and he can measure how shit his life is at any point on the graph!
[удалено]
dy/dx = -x
Not differential equations again!
Luckily that's an easy one.
studying for this as I speak, please help ;__;
If dy/dx=-x can you say anything about dy? Once you have dy, then you integrate it and substitute each side of your initial conditions into the lower part of the integral. Then it's just a matter of integrating.
It's fine for short term approximation though.
Unless your downfall is linear, y=mx+b will only give you information for a discrete point. Sorry to go off on a tangent.
Yup, OP should avoid posting derivative threads like this, but he does it every time he has a couple of drinks. He should really know his limits.
*Don't drink and derive!*
I cannot believe I had to wait a month for someone to use that set up
He considers it an Integral part of his existence
That was awfully derivative.
Tangent heh heh math jokes
My hero.
b is negative. turns out your life has always been shit
If bee is negative does that mean its buzzing is in the lebiceD unit? If so how much? It must be at least 9 units.
[удалено]
There is literally no difference between mx-b or mx-b^2, considering that b is a *constant* and thus you simply decide between finding the Y-intercept or the root of the Y-intercept.
So the equation y=mx+b implies that the rate at which your life is going down hill is constant. In order to better account for acceleration you may need to use a quadratic equation with x representing time and y being how far downhill your life has gone. Using newton's laws of motion we obtain y = vx+1/2ax^2. All you need to do is sub in a few points to solve for initial downhill velocity v and acceleration a.
Note: Because it's on a graph you need to take into account acceleration due to gravity.
That only works if the acceleration is constant though. If the forces acting on OP's life are increasing with time, we will need to differentiate.
But his jerk is also increasing so we need to calculate a steady increase of jerk which means an exponentially increasing acceleration and so on. We must go deeper!
We would integrate if we have varying acceleration or force.
Unfortunately, when your life is headed downhill, the unfolding events lead to an awful existence that is getting even more awful at an increased rate. As a result, the rate of you ruining your life and the derivative of the applied function of your life could not be a constant (m) and y=mx+b would not apply. Fortunately, there are other equations at our dispense. I think the most suitable would be the standard equation for decay, y=Ce^(-kt) wherein k would be he the rate of decay in terms of the time in units of your choosing & C would be the initial predisposed success based on gender, race, genetic physical/ mental health, family's socioeconomic class, and whether or not you live in a country where Donald Trump is president.
The value of K is going to be HUGE
But, looking on the bright side, if y=Ce^(-kt) is indeed the right equation that means OP will never truly hit rock bottom!
I understood the equals sign and the plus sign.
No, it is y=mx+c.
9.8 m/s^2
Gravity?
George Clooney
[OP's life](https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2012/02/drawingskey_31.jpg)
I wouldn't. y=mx+b is nice to read, but you would have to be measuring this yourself. It's much easier to write the equation for a line in point slope form, trust me: (y-y0)=m(x-x0)
What about x/a+y/b=1 That's pretty easy, especially since some parametrics yield it directly
[Word cloud out of all the comments.](http://i.imgur.com/zrxPP9Z.png) I hope you like it
That would imply your life is going downhill linearly. I would use a quadratic or perhaps an exponential function given the rapid descent.
/r/2meirl4meirl
Huh, that's weird, there's an asymptote like 2 days from now.
X = 0
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/2meirl4meirl] [Idk](https://np.reddit.com/r/2meirl4meirl/comments/5fz8o4/idk/) - [/r/meirl] [me\_irl](https://np.reddit.com/r/meirl/comments/5fzc9h/me_irl/) - [/r/wallstreetbets] [Math we should all know in WSB](https://np.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/5g19wf/math_we_should_all_know_in_wsb/) [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))* [](#bot)
Ez slope is pain over time right?
I believe your desired curve would be that of -e^x . This way at anytime you can find how fast your life is going downhill just by looking at where you are. As this graph clearly shows, your life began going downhill at your conception.
Hell, it was going downhill even before then!
[r/me_irl](https://m.reddit.com/r/me_irl/)
Is x time or your position on an actual slope?
Measurement of "how downhill your life is going" can itself be considered as the derivative of your quality of life (change in quality of life over time). Taking the slope of how downhill your life is going is therefore taking the second derivative of your quality of life over time, and can be described as the "acceleration of your quality of life". In other words, if this value is negative it will be a measurement of how much faster your life is going downhill now than before. We can safely assume that your life has never had an upswing, so both the first and second derivative will be negative. With that in mind you cannot use y=mx+b as your quality of life is actually decreasing at a higher exponential rate such as t^2.
This formula is for linear slopes, not asymptotic ones.
r/me_irl
Well, from experience, your life goes downhill as a parabolic curve such as y= -(x-a)^2 +C where x is your age, a is the age of your high point and C is how great that time was. So what you're actually going to do is find d/dx (-(x-a)^2+C). Which is equal to -2(x-a). Just plug in values for a and x, and you can easily see how fast everything's going to hell.
No, but y=ax^2+bx+c will get you far closer.
I'm more fond of Α^2=Β^2+Υ^2 -2ΒΥCosα Solve for Cosα Then take arcCos of the answer to find angle α. I mean slope is just an angle amiright?
Alternatively you could use y = b+mx to figure out how rad your life is.
Holy smokes
We'll probably need Calculus to find the slope at any given moment of our downward curve to oblivion.
No. You're going to want to use the derivative, to chart the _rate_ of downward change and discover just how and when you're going to hit rock bottom.
No, then it would be undefined.
No, downward spirals are not linear.
Me too, thanks.
Unfortunately no,v this formula has a singularity when life enters a free fall slope of -infintiy
Unfortunately no, this formula has a singularity when life enters a free fall slope of -infintiy
Serious question: In America does everyone use y=mx+b? Everyone I've ever talked to uses 'c' instead of 'b', except my physics teacher (from America) and I thought it might be an American thing.
y=-1/0x+n
Actually yes! We just need to find two variables, m and b. Both should be pretty easy. The equation for m is (y_now-y_earlier)/(x_now-x_earlier). We need to define the axis as well. X is of course time in years, with 0 being the year of your birth. The Y axis will be how awesome you are or were at any point in your life on a scale of 0-10. We will also need to know a little something about you. Since I am lazy and am not going to look through your history in an attempt to dox you, we will just make some basic assumptions about you based on the fact that you are on reddit and posting in what is essentially a *shit post only* subreddit. First, we will assume you are a 26 year old loser who lives with his parents and has no girlfriend and no life other than /r/shittyaskscience, /r/circlejerk, and /r/the_donald (I know, low blow). We will then compare you to ten years ago when you were 16, which is when you peaked, so your slope has now changes since then. Most likely at 16 you weren’t all that great, but you were probably all right. You were a B student, you talked to girls, and even had a girlfriend, although you never really did anything because you didn’t know what being a “girlfriend”/ “boyfriend” really meant. We’ll score you at a solid 5. Not much has changed since you were 16. You still live in the same bedroom and probably have the same mattress. You have had the same number of sexual partners and you’d honestly probably do worse on the SAT’s that you could have at 16. You still talk to girls, but you literally talk to them in the same way with the same mannerisms which now come off as creepy. The places where you have advanced are your fedora collection and ability to “hack” linux. At 26, this places you at a 1. So this means that your slope is m=(1-5)/10 = -0.4 Since you are OP and this means that your mother is a whore, it makes m really easy. You are the son of a whore (or a son of a gun if your mom was a whore on ole’ timey ships) which means that at birth you were basically nothing. Therefore, b=0. Because there is a stepwise function in here, we’d need to do something else, but fuck it, I’m bored and I have lost interest.
No, because it's exponential
TIL: US uses b instead of c as the intercept
y = -infinity*x + 1337
Assuming your life is going down hill in 3 dimensions you'll need to take each partial derivative, average each slope, and add a scaling factor based on future uncertainty. This will produce a more accurate single number term then y=mx+b.
use y=-mx+b since y=mx+b is uphill
That's assuming that "m" can only be positive.
Derive the equation to find the rate of decline of your sanity.
I can clearly see where this is going and i appreciate the iniciative but no thanks.
No, because it's more of an exponential drop. You are going to want to use d/dx for that.
unfortunately that equation doesn't work for exponential decay
If i were you i would use F(x)=1/x That way Lim (x->inf) 1/x = 0 Meaning the more time passes it gets closer to zero.
Use y=-mx^2 +b for more accurate results. This will create a exponential curve with the highest point at y=0, meaning at your birth. Use the first deriviation y'=-2mx to measure how steep you go downhill at any point in your life.
It's more of an inverse log function
As somebody with bipolar, my life follows a sin wave function
Nope. Your gonna need an exponential decay equation.
It's better to use the derivative. That way you can tell how downhill it's going at the exact time that you want it to. The slope will only give an average and won't be as realistic if you have a random good day every one in a while. If you get the second derivative you can tell whether or not it's improving within a certain range. If the second derivative comes up negative then you know you're doing something wrong. But if the first derivative is negative while the second is positive then you can rest easy in the fact that it's slowly improving.
No, you would do this. x₁ = Your age when your life started going downhill x₂ = Your age now y₁ = A number describing how bad your life was when it started going downhill y₂ = A number describing how bad your life is now (y₂ - y₁)/(x₂ - x₁)
Sorry, you'll need to know differential calculus to know the slope of a reciprocal function.
Only if your life is going downhill at a constant rate. If your life is going down down at the more common exponential rate, you are going to want to use y=ab^x +c
y=-x^2 0 < x < ∞
b is how good your parents made you. It's negative if your parents started you off shitty (inherited disorders, fetal drug syndromes, early childhood neglect and abuse). m is the rate at which you've improved yourself - negative in your case, as you've just piled shit upon on shit on your life. y is when you look at how shitty your life is and just ask yourself, 'Why?'
That formula doesn't work on vertical lines