Lec 25 | MIT 18.01 Single Variable Calculus, Fall 2007

[melisantika]

I am very happy to see the vidoe from you, hopefully the others also are happy for You

[Ondelendo]

I Love The Video Lecture 25: Exam 3 review It Can Increase My Knowledge

[bebeheuy]

Steady I Really Like This Video Lecture 25: Exam 3 review

[willamricard]

Nice Video Lecture 25: Exam 3 review That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You

[imegatrone]

I Really Like The Video From Your Exam 3 review

[anakmudajaman]

after i watched this video Lecture 25 Exam 3 review, my insight is very open because the video is very good to give information

[yonatanalemayehu]

what is not clear is not the concept, but the way the mathematician put it!!

[agapitoflores001]

pretty nice way of presenting the lesson. It is great! *applause*

[HaKKooN]

He should have been awarded with some applause at the end :)

[kotofu]

why did he label the axes to weirdly? Why did he use z for the vertical axe when he could have just used y to avoid confusion?

[MrBrad1213]

@kotofu In 3D, you need z-axis. The slices could not work without a 3D visualization. In my understanding, that's why he used the z-axis... which is the vertical when you talk 3D.

[kauboibiboppu]

this guy is bad ass



[alkalait]

"this is more than just a dead end; it's a crash, burn AND SELF DESTRUCT"

[gorgolyt]

cool, he did some multivariable stuff...

the Gaussian volume trick is so beautiful.

[skyfaze]

doesnt the application of simpson's rule require n to be an even number?

[michalchik]

Is this the last lecture or are their more coming.

[mabell01]

How is a volume equal to an area squared?

Volume is length cubed and area is length squared so I'm just wondering if anyone can clear that for me.

[AlmightyInsanity]

Actually, V = Q*Q doesn't mean both Q has the dimension of area. Look at the first line at 33:30 the latter "Q" is deprived from an integration of a non-unit value i.e. exp(-y^2) and its dimension should be equivalent to a length, not an area though its numerical value is Q. However,the dimension of exp(-t^2) in the direct integration of Q is indeed length. To avoid all the confusion you should think of them all as numerical value with no unit.

[saltydog78]

What if 1 = .9999999999999999999999999

then why does: 1/3 = .333333333333333333333

3*(1/3) = .9999999999999999999999999999,­ but

.999999999999999999999 = 1 why?

[doob10163]

You cannot assume that

"1 = .9999999999999999999999999"

because that is clearly false.

1 = .9999999999999.... infinitely repeating.

"then why does: 1/3 = .333333333333333333333"

It doesn't. See above.

"3*(1/3) = .9999999999999999999999999999"

Wrong.

[joshuaissac]

Because your calculator can only work to a certain number of digits?

[michalchik]

From pre-algebra in Junior HIgh

x=.99999999999999999

10x = 9.999999999999999

10x - 1 = 9

9x=9

x=1

QED

[saltydog78]

Pre-Algebra in Junior High, do they teach you how to subtract on both sides? Because then you will have 10x = 9.99999999999 10x -1 = 8.9999999999 However, solving for x 10x = 9.999999999 x = 9.99999/(10) x = .99999999. You missed my point though. If 1= .999999999999999 (inf.) Because 1/3 = .333333333333333(inf.) 3*(1/3) = 3*.3333333333333(inf.) hence 1 = .9999999999999999(inf.) Have a counter example?

[michalchik]

A counter example to what?

[michalchik]

sorry shoudk read

10x -1x = 9.999999... -.999999999

9x = 9