|
- 知乎 - 有问题，就会有答案
知乎，中文互联网高质量的问答社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，于 2011 年 1 月正式上线，以「让人们更好的分享知识、经验和见解，找到自己的解答」为品牌使命。
- 1 8, 1 4, 1 2, 3 4,7 8英寸分别是多少厘米? - 知乎
把1英寸分成8等分: 1 8 1 4 3 8 1 2 5 8 3 4 7 8 英寸。 This is an arithmetic sequence since there is a common difference between each term In this case, adding 18 to the previous term in the sequence gives the next term In other words, an=a1+d (n−1) Arithmetic Sequence: d=1 8
- Word，插入多级列表，但是改了1. 1，第二章的2. 1也变成1. 1，随着改变而改变，这种情况怎么处? - 知乎
注1：【】代表软件中的功能文字 注2：同一台电脑，只需要设置一次，以后都可以直接使用 注3：如果觉得原先设置的格式不是自己想要的，可以继续点击【多级列表】——【定义新多级列表】，找到相应的位置进行修改
- Formal proof for $ (-1) \times (-1) = 1$ - Mathematics Stack Exchange
Is there a formal proof for $(-1) \\times (-1) = 1$? It's a fundamental formula not only in arithmetic but also in the whole of math Is there a proof for it or is it just assumed?
- What is the value of $1^i$? - Mathematics Stack Exchange
There are infinitely many possible values for $1^i$, corresponding to different branches of the complex logarithm The confusing point here is that the formula $1^x = 1$ is not part of the definition of complex exponentiation, although it is an immediate consequence of the definition of natural number exponentiation
- If $A A^{-1} = I$, does that automatically imply $A^{-1} A = I$?
This is same as AA -1 It means that we first apply the A -1 transformation which will take as to some plane having different basis vectors If we think what is the inverse of A -1 ? We are basically asking that what transformation is required to get back to the Identity transformation whose basis vectors are i ^ (1,0) and j ^ (0,1)
- abstract algebra - Prove that 1+1=2 - Mathematics Stack Exchange
Possible Duplicate: How do I convince someone that $1+1=2$ may not necessarily be true? I once read that some mathematicians provided a very length proof of $1+1=2$ Can you think of some way to
- Why is $1 i$ equal to $-i$? - Mathematics Stack Exchange
While 1 i = i−1 1 i = i 1 is true (pretty much by definition), if we have a value c c such that c∗i = 1 c ∗ i = 1 then c= i−1 c = i 1 This is because we know that inverses in the complex numbers are unique
|
|
|