<p>Lol, or you can go with the lagrangian stuff if thats your style. "i like to minimize my path and action in everything i do..." ew. thats sounds so stupid.
Or how about, "im e^x. Nothing you do can change me." Oh god, thats even worse than the last one.</p>
<p>Or how about, "im e^x. Nothing you do can change me." Oh god, thats even worse than the last one.</p>
<p>z = f(x,y) = ke^(x+y) where x(t)= t and y(t) = t what do u think this is you ass. ill admit ive been a bit more poetic than your thing. im gonna use it to call out how i have a tendency of doing what i want regardless of what people think or how they try and stop me. For instance, I recently just used my own money to buy an electric piano and books to finally self-teach myself an instrument, since while I was growing up my family could not (or at least would not) afford one. also dad -heroine, prostitution, gambing bankrupted family. etc. etc.</p>
<p>btw here is my actual phrasing:</p>
<p>z = f(x,y) = ke^(x+y) where ‘k’ is a self-determined constant, ‘x’ and ‘y’ are given by functions the time x(t)= t/2 and y(t) = t/2 and respectively represent maturity and experience in terms of time, and z is ___________. </p>
<p>it sound corny i sort of know, but 1. im trying to actually do an essay with only 1-2 pages. 2. I really do not wanna mock the adcoms or at least make it seem like im trying to. 3. this paper is supposed to be more about me than the damn equation.</p>
<p>er getting rid of the t variable since that basically turns it into your lame-ass equation.</p>
<p>heh, you should have recognized my equation as a damped oscillatory solution.</p>
<p>as t->infinitity, personal success and professional success go to zero (in the domain [-1,1]) is more supposed to represent finding a middle ground rather than settling at zero</p>
<p>lol, he's right, it looks like an underdamped oscillator. haha how creative.
And, seiken, I have no graphical intuition, so I checked out your graph. I think you made a good choice.</p>
<p>"you should have recognized my equation as a damped oscillatory solution"</p>
<p>I know more about beanie babies, what the hell is that?</p>
<p>it is the solution to the DE:
x** + 2zeta x* + w^2 x = 0</p>
<p>for zeta [0,1) ... or underdamped
which is basically just a damped spring...</p>
<p>oh i see. I am actually taking differential equations this upcoming quarter. I actually figured it was the solution to something like that, but just had no clue what.</p>
<p>revision: it isn't the solution to that GE in particular but something like that GE.</p>
<p>APPLICATION SUBMITTED! wish me luck
you think they would reject a previous admit with a 4.0 (lots of A+s too) in a curriculum that advanced his ranking 2 years in 2 quarters? im really worried already. eep. REINFORCE ME DAMMIT!</p>
<p>oh and i guess wish me luck to mit, cornell, stanford, and u chicago just in case.</p>
<p>RocketDA, by GE do you mean the governing equation? Or did you just mistype DE?</p>
<p>im guessing he meant DE, but what-ev.</p>
<p>oops. yeah, i meant "that DE" since i was intending to refer to the spring model.</p>
<p>DE: diff eq
GE: governing eq</p>
<p>my bad.</p>