Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Google)   Sqrt(x^2+y^2)   (google.com) divider line 95
    More: Interesting, kde, sqrt  
•       •       •

13915 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Nov 2012 at 10:40 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-19 07:31:25 AM  
dejareviewer.files.wordpress.com


/content6.flixster.com
 
2012-11-19 08:23:14 AM  
I read that as "squirt" and thought of porn and was impressed by the green. Then I realized I spend far too much time on the interwebs.

/I was told there would be no math
 
2012-11-19 08:30:49 AM  
Dammit subby!

I had shiat to do today.
 
2012-11-19 10:17:31 AM  

Donnchadha: Dammit subby!

I had shiat to do today.


Fortunately, my computer doesn't support WebGL, and we're running WSUS so I can't just go to Windows Update

/although there are still other ways
 
2012-11-19 10:30:24 AM  
Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.
 
2012-11-19 10:44:26 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: [dejareviewer.files.wordpress.com image 321x279]


/[content6.flixster.com image 350x350]


1 + 2 + 1 + SHUT UP!
 
2012-11-19 10:45:26 AM  
Sweet.
 
2012-11-19 10:46:00 AM  

KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.


TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.
 
2012-11-19 10:47:33 AM  
Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).
 
2012-11-19 10:51:37 AM  
*trippin balls*
 
2012-11-19 10:52:27 AM  

Donnchadha: KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.

TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.


....with that awesome 160 x 100 black and white LCD screen, yeah.
 
2012-11-19 10:53:11 AM  

Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).


I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that.
 
2012-11-19 10:56:01 AM  
log(sqrt(x^2+y^2)) = black hole = O_O
 
2012-11-19 10:58:52 AM  
Reminds me of the old Apple Graphing Calculator app that was included with some version of the OS, years ago. (Hm, still seems to be around, called Grapher)

Spent hours playing with that in the computer lab in grade school, trying to get bizarre, 3-d animated zero divides to do weird shiat.

/not a nerd
//can't imagine why you'd think that
 
2012-11-19 11:01:13 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: Donnchadha: KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.

TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.

....with that awesome 160 x 100 black and white LCD screen, yeah.


...and it only costs $149.99. The same price it cost when I was in high school. in 1996.

No wonder Texas Instruments is getting creamed financially. These things should cost $20 based on component prices. Stupid.
 
2012-11-19 11:03:37 AM  
Came for Pythagoras, leaving.
 
2012-11-19 11:04:09 AM  
How do we rule 34 this thing?
 
2012-11-19 11:04:17 AM  

Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).


It's the URL. If you type it in manually, it works fine. But the web server/browser/whatever is stripping out the "+" sign from the formula when you click on the link.
 
2012-11-19 11:09:12 AM  

gameshowhost: log(sqrt(x^2+y^2)) = black hole = O_O


I like THIS version better
 
2012-11-19 11:10:39 AM  

47 is the new 42: Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).

I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that.


Order of operations is for people that actually finish coding their projects, why would you expect it in a google app?
 
2012-11-19 11:12:23 AM  

whistleridge: HMS_Blinkin: Donnchadha: KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.

TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.

....with that awesome 160 x 100 black and white LCD screen, yeah.

...and it only costs $149.99. The same price it cost when I was in high school. in 1996.

No wonder Texas Instruments is getting creamed financially. These things should cost $20 based on component prices. Stupid.


Especially considering I have a graphing calculator app on my smartphone that does everything my TI-86 can do, does it faster and with a clearer image, and was a FREE download. The only reason I keep the TI is that my math professor (wisely) doesn't allow the use of calculators with wireless capability during exams.
 
2012-11-19 11:14:22 AM  
Hasn't Wolfram Alpha been doing this for years? Seriously awesome engine for very specific types of searches.
 
2012-11-19 11:17:35 AM  
 
2012-11-19 11:21:07 AM  

Bondith: OtherLittleGuy: [dejareviewer.files.wordpress.com image 321x279]


/[content6.flixster.com image 350x350]

1 + 2 + 1 + SHUT UP!


3D graphing capability is just a red herring
 
2012-11-19 11:24:01 AM  
Why is this interesting? A statement on the simplicity of complex math graphing on the intarwebs or something?
 
2012-11-19 11:28:32 AM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


I smirked.
 
2012-11-19 11:30:39 AM  
With teeth

sqrt(x^2+1 y^3)
 
2012-11-19 11:32:19 AM  

Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).


The plus sign is treated as a space character in urls. To get it to be an actual plus side, subby would've had to use the escaped version (%2B). So you were really meant to end up here: 

https://www.google.com/search?output=search&q=sqrt(x^2+y^2)
 
2012-11-19 11:34:59 AM  
Oh no! We are sorry, but your browser does not seem to support WebGL.

You can upgrade by clicking this link.

You may want to download one of the following browsers to view WebGL content.

The following browsers support WebGL on Windows:

Mozilla Firefox

Google Chrome



www.gearedforgamers.com
 
2012-11-19 11:35:06 AM  
 
2012-11-19 11:49:52 AM  
So where's my WebGL SecondLife viewer? Hmph.
 
2012-11-19 11:53:56 AM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


A mathematical model....that describes boobs. I've lived the perfect life so far.
 
2012-11-19 11:54:03 AM  
Math - art that never stops giving.
 
2012-11-19 11:59:56 AM  
Just found out that WebGL.org is a lie, because also Opera supports it, only you have to enable HW acceleration and WebGL.

Great.

image.spreadshirt.com
 
2012-11-19 12:07:57 PM  
To be fair, the TI nSpire(AKA, the non-deprecated TI-89) has a 160x100 color screen.
 
2012-11-19 12:09:55 PM  
hehe teh Boobies is cool.
 
2012-11-19 12:11:38 PM  
the reason TI calculators cost what they do is the same reason college textbooks do
 
2012-11-19 12:13:44 PM  

whistleridge: HMS_Blinkin: Donnchadha: KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.

TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.

....with that awesome 160 x 100 black and white LCD screen, yeah.

...and it only costs $149.99. The same price it cost when I was in high school. in 1996.

No wonder Texas Instruments is getting creamed financially. These things should cost $20 based on component prices. Stupid.


Say what you want about current pricing, but I still have my TI-86 and TI-89 (that I got in high school.... in 1996).... and they run just perfectly. I have no reason to replace them.

That being said, the fancy sparkly crap they're trying to push these days is just stupid. I hope mine never break so I don't have to replace them with this crap. Oh, but they're fancy colors with curved keys! Shut up -- graphing calculators are to be utilitarian. The TI-86 is already too fancy with it's Apple Infringing rounded corners... *ahem*

Um... I mean... yeah...
 
2012-11-19 12:24:43 PM  
Not a bookmark so I can check this out when I can get home and be on a REAL computer instead of this piece of crap work gave me.


/You'd think someone doing IT management for an ISP would have a powerhouse.
//but noooooooo.....
 
2012-11-19 12:52:21 PM  
Would a Fark Math Guy explain to me why this is a 3D function? Where does the third dimension come from?

-kthnkbi
 
2012-11-19 12:53:25 PM  

H31N0US: Came for Pythagoras, leaving.


Are you at least going to call him later?
 
2012-11-19 12:57:11 PM  

Rent Party: Would a Fark Math Guy explain to me why this is a 3D function? Where does the third dimension come from?

-kthnkbi


for graphing purposes when you have two variables and no "=" anywhere, it's assumed that what you want is "the third variable =".

In this case, since you have x and y, "z=" is implied.
 
2012-11-19 12:58:46 PM  

Rent Party: Would a Fark Math Guy explain to me why this is a 3D function? Where does the third dimension come from?

-kthnkbi


It's a function from 2 dimensional space to 1 dimensional space. So to draw the graph, you need 2+1=3 dimensions.
 
2012-11-19 01:01:18 PM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


That was funny. Wish I could work that into my PDE class's homework without getting fired.
 
2012-11-19 01:12:42 PM  

traylor: Oh no! We are sorry, but your browser does not seem to support WebGL.


I got this, too, with FF. Firefox insists that I need to upgrade my graphics card drivers to allow this functionality on my computer. However it works fine with Chrome, so it's not my graphics card. What gives?
 
2012-11-19 01:15:59 PM  

The Bestest: Rent Party: Would a Fark Math Guy explain to me why this is a 3D function? Where does the third dimension come from?

-kthnkbi

for graphing purposes when you have two variables and no "=" anywhere, it's assumed that what you want is "the third variable =".

In this case, since you have x and y, "z=" is implied.


And also...


It's a function from 2 dimensional space to 1 dimensional space. So to draw the graph, you need 2+1=3 dimensions.


Thank you both. Fark has made me smarter, which almost never happens. :)
 
2012-11-19 01:19:20 PM  
You can put other stuff in there. For example, I asked to calculate "one hunk of burning love" and received lots of data on the Elvis Presley album of the same name.
 
2012-11-19 01:20:46 PM  

Rent Party: Would a Fark Math Guy or Gal (paging techmom) explain to me why this is a 3D function? Where does the third dimension come from?

-kthnkbi


FTFY on the basis of "girls do math too"

/and one atomic F*** YOU to Barbie for trying to say otherwise
//biatch
 
2012-11-19 01:24:20 PM  
shuisman.com
 
2012-11-19 01:24:23 PM  

Rent Party: Thank you both. Fark has made me smarter, which almost never happens. :)


Should I insult you or something just to even it out?
 
2012-11-19 01:33:14 PM  

Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).


Ah, thank you. I was trying to figure out why the graph looked totally wrong.
 
2012-11-19 01:33:33 PM  
What's the difference between that and a TI calculator?

Oh, it's that a calculator is portable while that link didn't work on my mobile.
 
2012-11-19 02:05:22 PM  
For those interested in mobile apps as calculator replacements, I suggest checking out MathStudio (formerly SpaceTime, I think). I haven't reviewed it comprehensively, but for what I've seen, its capabilities seem to fall somewhere in between a TI-89 and Mathematica (a pretty wide gulf, granted). I don't recall the price, but it's not free.
 
2012-11-19 02:08:16 PM  

I May Be Crazy But...: Rent Party: Thank you both. Fark has made me smarter, which almost never happens. :)

Should I insult you or something just to even it out?


THANK YOU SIR MAY I HAVE ANOTHER?!!!
 
2012-11-19 02:17:54 PM  

Zombalupagus: traylor: Oh no! We are sorry, but your browser does not seem to support WebGL.

I got this, too, with FF. Firefox insists that I need to upgrade my graphics card drivers to allow this functionality on my computer. However it works fine with Chrome, so it's not my graphics card. What gives?


It's on account that Firefox allows one to turn WebGL off (and for a time, IT departments were actually recommending it).

To turn it back on, type "about:config" in the address bar, agree you'll promise to be careful :D, search (in the little filter bar) for "webgl.disabled", and click it once to set it to default if it was set to true.
 
2012-11-19 02:18:26 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Order of operations is for people that actually finish coding their projects, why would you expect it in a google app?


Google gets it right, but whoever posted the URL gets it wrong. "+" in a URL means space. If you go to Google and type in the equation, and look at the URL, you'll see %2B where the + should be, which is correct.
 
2012-11-19 02:33:12 PM  

whistleridge: HMS_Blinkin: Donnchadha: KarmicDisaster: Wow, I can throw my TI86 away now.

TI-86 can't do 3D graphs --- the TI-89 can though.

....with that awesome 160 x 100 black and white LCD screen, yeah.

...and it only costs $149.99. The same price it cost when I was in high school. in 1996.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-11-19 02:50:33 PM  
I have a TI-85.

/my lawn
//get off of it
 
2012-11-19 03:03:24 PM  
I'm guessing this link is more interesting not on my phone.
 
2012-11-19 03:06:16 PM  
I still have no idea what you people are talking about.

Why is this link interesting?
 
2012-11-19 03:16:53 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: I'm guessing this link is more interesting not on my phone.


fickenchucker: I still have no idea what you people are talking about.

Why is this link interesting?


It's a demonstration of Google's 3D graphing capability using WebGL.
 
2012-11-19 04:09:27 PM  
Isn't webGL still filled with all sorts of security holes or did they fix that?
 
2012-11-19 04:10:54 PM  
I still have my TI-86 from 1992. Still works.

Paid $104 out of my stockboy paycheck for it.
 
2012-11-19 04:12:03 PM  

theresnothinglft: Isn't webGL still filled with all sorts of security holes or did they fix that?


You're going to www.google.com with scripting turned on. WebGL's security holes should be the least of your concerns...
 
2012-11-19 04:15:10 PM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


hahahahahahahahahahahaha, that really ramps up the ol 5318008 now doesn't it.
 
2012-11-19 04:33:11 PM  
The water droplet ripple:
sin(1* sqrt(x^2 + y^2)) * (1 / sqrt(x^2 + y^2))
 
2012-11-19 04:57:21 PM  
2*sqrt(-abs(abs(x)-1)*abs(3-abs(x))/((abs(x)-1)*(3-abs(x))))(1+abs(abs (x)-3)/(abs(x)-3))sqrt(1-(x/7)^2)+(5+0.97(abs(x-.5)+abs(x+.5))-3(abs(x -.75)+abs(x+.75)))(1+abs(1-abs(x))/(1-abs(x))),-3sqrt(1-(x/7)^2)sqrt(a bs(abs(x)-4)/(abs(x)-4)),abs(x/2)-0.0913722(x^2)-3+sqrt(1-(abs(abs(x)- 2)-1)^2),(2.71052+(1.5-.5abs(x))-1.35526sqrt(4-(abs(x)-1)^2))sqrt(abs( abs(x)-1)/(abs(x)-1))+0.9
 
2012-11-19 04:59:40 PM  

supek: I have a TI-85.

/my lawn
//get off of it


I took three semesters of calculus with nothing more then a fancy scientific calculator, you kids and your graphing features.

/This is 1992 & 1993
//yes my classmates thought I was insane.
 
2012-11-19 05:01:10 PM  

supek: I have a TI-85.

/my lawn
//get off of it


TI-81 pre-lithium backup. (7/91 datecode)

Co-workers HP-65 finally died a few months ago. He has a sad as he's been using it for 20+ years since he started working here. Our boss bought our 2 apparently cheaply 30 years ago. The other one died in the late 90's.
 
2012-11-19 05:50:19 PM  
I used Google Chrome 23 on Fedora 17, no WebGL. I tried it with Firefox 16 on the same system, it worked just fine. I'm amused.
 
2012-11-19 07:03:17 PM  

Bondith: Actually, now that I look at it...the search term input is sqrt(x2 * y2), but Google graphed sqrt(x(2y^2)).


That is because subby wasn't smart enough to put a "+" sign between the x2 and y2 terms, so google did it correctly since it followed order of operations.

fail subby.
 
2012-11-19 07:36:16 PM  
The day fark discovers math beyond the arithmetic needed to acquire beer.
 
2012-11-19 07:50:50 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: supek: I have a TI-85.

/my lawn
//get off of it

I took three semesters of calculus with nothing more then a fancy scientific calculator, you kids and your graphing features.

/This is 1992 & 1993
//yes my classmates thought I was insane.


None of my professors past pre-calc ever allowed even 4-function calculators. Somehow I survived.
 
2012-11-19 08:27:12 PM  
sqrt(x*x+y*y)+3*cos(sqrt(x*x+y*y))+5 

This is from a related website.
 
2012-11-19 08:28:43 PM  
Neat.

This is my bookmark.
 
2012-11-19 08:39:17 PM  

UsikFark: sqrt(x*x+y*y)+3*cos(sqrt(x*x+y*y))+5 

This is from a related website.


Glad to see this is covered.
 
2012-11-19 08:39:56 PM  
I still have my Novus RPN calculator from the early 70's. Also remember having an HP 34C when I took Calculus. The calculator App I use on my phone now is also RPN. Once you learn RPN, you never go back.
 
2012-11-19 10:19:35 PM  

tgetzoya: I used Google Chrome 23 on Fedora 17, no WebGL. I tried it with Firefox 16 on the same system, it worked just fine. I'm amused.


same deal with me on Kubuntu. I think it's because Chrome won't use WebGL without hardware acceleration and Firefox will use it without hardware acceleration. In both cases there are probably very hidden flags (about:config or something) that would allow you to override it.
 
2012-11-19 11:15:33 PM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


everywhere I go I see something that reminds me of her
 
2012-11-19 11:35:04 PM  

jonny_q: tgetzoya: I used Google Chrome 23 on Fedora 17, no WebGL. I tried it with Firefox 16 on the same system, it worked just fine. I'm amused.

same deal with me on Kubuntu. I think it's because Chrome won't use WebGL without hardware acceleration and Firefox will use it without hardware acceleration. In both cases there are probably very hidden flags (about:config or something) that would allow you to override it.


As someone who is incredibly PLEASED with Linux after a catastrophic system wipe that left me net-less for six months...

... I'd just like to say that Mint handles WebGL just fine without needing anything more than driver updates.

/This is an out-of-the-box rig (HP A9000X) that's a few years old, running a measly 2GB of DDR2 and isn't giving me any issues whatsoever, people are also already into the point of making really complex stuff on it - lots of pages about possibly using a DL-V of WebGL for simple 3D graphics. Also; there is an Android free version in the works, and Google will release it for $19.95 on iStore at the same time. This is just awesome, honestly.
 
2012-11-19 11:52:47 PM  
Reminds me of the golden age of my (limited) mathematical education... The early 80's when Martin Gardener was writing the "Mathematical Recreations" column in Scientific American, I had my first real computer (with 512x380 mono graphics!) and my G/F had a solid connection to good dope.

Then someone gave me a copy of "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" and things *really* got interesting.

Anyway, of interest to some Farkers: There's a formula for plotting a pretty good pot leaf (or maple leaf, with some changes) in the polar plane. It's too close to my bedtime for me to figure out all the cos and sin I'd have to add to translate it from cartesian even if I still remembered the constants, but if any Farker wants to try it, think "Asymmetric Lissajous function for the basic shape, modified by Rho multiplied by some constant and some modular arithmetic to give the jagged edges of the leaves.

That's a 2d function, but there should be some way to get either X or Y to be constant.

(has not played with this google thing, thinks it's a neat idea, am hoping to wake up to all sorts of neat tricks)
 
2012-11-19 11:54:20 PM  
Man this stuff is changing fast. I thought programming a quadratic formula solver on a TI-84 was cool shiat back in high school, then in college calc and physics classes I was using Mathematica to do 3-D plots, solve systems of equations and normalize wave functions, now I get to discretize complex mechanical systems in MatLab and just earlier today I put Octave on my phone. A phone! I've long since thrown away the TI for the much simpler and easy to use Casio FX-115

Side note, knowing Mathematica functions and syntax makes Wolfram Alpha about a hundred times more useful.
 
2012-11-19 11:55:59 PM  
Wow, 80 posts and nobody caught the graph for sqrt(x^(2*y^2)) is not sqrt(x^2+y^2), Doh!
 
2012-11-20 12:53:52 AM  
do you know this only works for integers powers of 2? I have the most wonderful proof for this, but this comment block is too small to contain it.
 
2012-11-20 01:00:22 AM  

Great Porn Dragon: Zombalupagus: traylor: Oh no! We are sorry, but your browser does not seem to support WebGL.

I got this, too, with FF. Firefox insists that I need to upgrade my graphics card drivers to allow this functionality on my computer. However it works fine with Chrome, so it's not my graphics card. What gives?

It's on account that Firefox allows one to turn WebGL off (and for a time, IT departments were actually recommending it).

To turn it back on, type "about:config" in the address bar, agree you'll promise to be careful :D, search (in the little filter bar) for "webgl.disabled", and click it once to set it to default if it was set to true.


Very educational. However, as it turn out it actually wasn't disabled.
 
2012-11-20 01:04:30 AM  

Zombalupagus: Very educational. However, as it turn out it actually wasn't disabled.


I guess I should have used an exclamation point after educational. Without it, it just sounds like "Well, duh! I knew that!"... which I didn't. So it was interesting to learn that little trick but the problem seems to be elsewhere. Ah well, that's why I keep a backup web browser, after all...
 
2012-11-20 01:24:40 AM  
sqrt(((sqrt((x^2/pi) (y^2/pi))*(pi^3))^5/pi)^(x/(pi^3)(y*pi^3))
 
2012-11-20 01:25:36 AM  

xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))


Adjusted for overfitting

img844.imageshack.us
 
2012-11-20 01:36:27 AM  
cos(sin(sqrt(x*x+y*y)+5*cos(sqrt(x*x+y*y))+5))
 
2012-11-20 01:37:36 AM  

no icon tact: xelnia: redmond24: How do we rule 34 this thing?

Someone posted a few examples awhile back. The best:

exp((‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))/1000)+exp((‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))/1000 ) + 0.1*exp(‑(((x+4)^2+(y+4)^2)^2))+0.1*exp(‑(((x-4)^2+(y-4)^2)^2))

Adjusted for overfitting

[img844.imageshack.us image 549x585]


Looks just like how I remember my first girlfriend... the right one was a little bigger, and they were kinda sad and droopy even at 16.

//'course, things were kinda lonely at the farm.
//was gonna go for the "that's just udderly ridiculous" line
 
2012-11-20 03:57:36 AM  

albuquerquehalsey: 2*sqrt(-abs(abs(x)-1)*abs(3-abs(x))/((abs(x)-1)*(3-abs(x))))(1+abs(ab s (x)-3)/(abs(x)-3))sqrt(1-(x/7)^2)+(5+0.97(abs(x-.5)+abs(x+.5))-3(abs(x -.75)+abs(x+.75)))(1+abs(1-abs(x))/(1-abs(x))),-3sqrt(1-(x/7)^2)sqrt(a bs(abs(x)-4)/(abs(x)-4)),abs(x/2)-0.0913722(x^2)-3+sqrt(1-(abs(abs(x)- 2)-1)^2),(2.71052+(1.5-.5abs(x))-1.35526sqrt(4-(abs(x)-1)^2))sqrt(abs( abs(x)-1)/(abs(x)-1))+0.9


Cute, but you do realize that most of the people here can't see the results of your work becasue you left some spaces in, which google seems really not to like.

Try this
 
2012-11-20 05:24:21 AM  

Drunken_Polar_Bear: Not a bookmark so I can check this out when I can get home and be on a REAL computer instead of this piece of crap work gave me.


/You'd think someone doing IT management for an ISP would have a powerhouse.
//but noooooooo.....


No. You would think someone who make special effects should have a powerhouse but if you just run network stuff and web development?

8GB dual core 2Ghz good network card 1TB drive

Am I far off?
 
2012-11-20 05:26:33 AM  
^ make=makes
 
2012-11-21 01:30:14 AM  
Works fine on my Android phone.
 
2012-11-22 03:02:25 PM  
 
Displayed 95 of 95 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report