I Took an Econ Class and It Halved My IQ 

Why did you like your own comment

No

How was this comment from 3 weeks ago

How is this so old

Bro missed an opportunity to say first 3 weeks before anyone else.

Im a CS kid but took an econ class. I haven't read shit for supply/demand graphs and couldnt be bothered to figure out what they actually represent lmfao. I just memorized that if supply goes up, then the funny line goes one way instead of the other. Prolly my own incompetence but they way they word these econ textbooks genuinely gives me an aneursym. Its like they purposely try to make it as hard as possible to understand. Compared to a book on math proofs, math proofs are so much easier to understand cus they dont muddy the conversation with random bullshit lol

Funny as hell lmao

Yea as someone who graduated community college with a business admin degree and then a private college with a finance degree, the troglodytism is absurd in our field. People don’t understand the most basic concepts that are just fundamentally true like if you add 2 to a number it goes up by 2 and if you take x2 and subtract x1 and then divide by x1 you get growth rates. Legit knew people who couldn’t write a paragraph in even 60% readable English(as native speakers) about how advertising would increase potential customer base. These were all seniors in Finance.

@@MinecraftPigSniper " if you take x2 and subtract x1 and then divide by x1 you get growth rates"? What does the "x" mean. Edit: The numbers in x1 and x2 are subscripts, so x1 and x2, and just two different "x-coordinates". I just didn't realise they were subscripts. Also, in the context, it almost seemed like an operation (multiplication), since it's right after having spoken about addition of 2. Thanks for the clarification.

@@aycoded7840 I think they mean the percentage change in growth. e.g a company makes $10k in month 1, and $12k in month 2. So ($20k - $10k)/$10k = 0.2 so the growth rate from month 1 to month 2 is 20%

One of those things happens to be their brain

Jargon. The specialized knowledge is jargon. I took a grad-level course straddling math and econ departments. We worked together on problem sets: the econ majors translated the questions into English, we solved them, and they would copy the answers. Real head-scratchers like "find the area of a triangle."

Or biology.

@@mikelake1306I took two levels of economics, and literally both classes were 90% just finding the area of a triangle.

You know that its not that uncommon for people like me to have degrees in at least two of those, I have degrees in geography and economics, economics from a social science program, not business. Econ-stats is offered as its own degree.

me when p val is .051

@@nicholasgutin8577that’s a bit high 💀

stalinsort but for data

@@nicholasgutin8577 that's fucking painful

this is why there is a replication crisis going on in academia right now.

Yeah you have to remember that physics data come from experiments that can have flaws and human errors. Like maybe I diluted this thing one more time that I should 😅. And that's why sometimes when you see so fucking big error you can just say yeah someone fucked up this sample. Because you know other option is to full recreate experiment to obtain new set of data.

There's the data science gulag for bad analyses and bad interpretations of data, but just deleting data you don't like is deserving of actual academic fraud jail tbh.

Unfortunately, modern-day academia is "publish or perish." And also, finding results gets you published while "I did the experiment, nothing of note was discovered" doesn't. Combine these two and even people who know better can get pressured into just falsifying data.

this, as a chemist

@@warpig2148 that's cope. Unless you save the ID and diagnostics for each data point and can prove that the outlier is caused by known bugs or human error, you can't just assume it is bad data. The proper course of action would be to adjust your base model assumptions, or accept a lower r^2 value.

as a sociology student this explains why sociologists often have to pick up behind economists forgetting that people aren’t just numbers

@@chesspiece4257 The last thing I wanted to endorse with my comment was even less math-savvy Economists, but here we are

@@chesspiece4257 Do they cover the Replication Crisis at all in sociology class? I know that psychology, economics, and political science have started addressing their replication crisis; but I don't hear too much about sociology tackling it.

Econ is brain dead easy until your professor tells you to download R. That’s when you get your real stats focused shit (and programming)

@@josephburchanowski4636 Econ's replication crisis stems from the lack of historical economic data- GDP as an indicator isn't even a century old, so we've always had to make do with things like grain wages and baskets of goods that we inference were historically considered essentials. This is in essence a problem that will resolve itself, as time goes on and we have much more year on year financial data

Man, I so envy you guys who got to choose your classes in High School. I had the “profile” system, where I only got to choose the rough profile of my classes. Well, at least I didn’t choose Matex.

Bro it was me and my friends in geometry and everyone else I swore had a lead binky when they were an infant. Because the class average of 42 out of 26 people (5 of them my friends who all got 80s 90s) it was baffling. Same whenever I talked to most business majors.

Wow that’s very different from my hs Econ experience. I took AP Econ and it was actually a great class, there was a few idiots but a lot of people were smart and I had a great teacher who taught us a lot of valuable and interesting things.

@@emberthecatgirl8796 ... The fuck is matex???

Doing a level computer science gives the same vibes my guy, I've become the classes tech support atp

Nope Econ is absolute crap too

@@hickoryst.6961 I can confirm economics jokes only go down well with other economists

@@hickoryst.6961 Not my experience (did the first 2 years of an Economics PhD, before I was fed up and left with only the Masters) Economists like to (ab)use math to show the world and themselves how clever they are. But generally they neither have a deeper understanding of the math they are using not or the real-life phenomena they describe with it. Next life, I'd rather learn plumbing than spend time on Economics. With plumbing, at least, you get actual sh*t done...

Yeah but let these labcoats keep their superiority.

Exactly. Macro is the only Econ that is repsectable and even that has some serious problems.

Profile picture checks out.

@@wind_doe hehe. I set that in sixth grade when chemistry became my one personality trait. A friend’s mom is a chemist and she was working with vitamin B12 so thats what I made my newly acquired google account. Good times

@@nicazer based friend's mommy admirer

That's a big thing in getting phd's hire Indians to peer review for a couple hundred bucks

Yurp, 50+% of academic studies just make shit up or P hack the everliving crap out of it. Source: basically nobody double checks most "scientific" papers, and peer "review" is mostly a joke because everyone is in on it. Source2: retractionwatch

its a business econ track, the actual economics track (especially for people looking to go to grad school) usually uses a proof based approach to stats and econometrics

@@ScansGMS Can confirm. I did my first year of bachelors in economics, while its maths was nowhere near the level I ended up doing when I went into physics it was definitely more rigorous than what is described here. Also you would never have points docked for a rounding choice.

@@philippeturgeon6730 right, and at a grad school level real analysis is now an unwritten prerequisite to entry. in fact, most of the people looking to go to grad school in economics at jeff’s uni usually take more math than that (theory of ordinary/partial differential equations, functional/complex analysis, measure theory, abstract algebra, etc.)

Idk, eat glue and do insider trading? If the VC scene is any indicator

I think undergraduate economics is widely regarded as a joke and only really a prep session for graduate economics, which most of the economics majors don't do. My brother has a Master's in economics and that was the sense i got from what i saw, too.

Normalize using the human senses!

i did this but more then once and then

You have a sixth form? And it's not even your final form?

how many forms do you have

@@marshallschaefer9632 ingerland

When your teacher is actually a 1800 scientist who invented time travel

Econ classes don't teach economics; They teach the professor's political opinions.

I mean yeah why would you say "No"

@@jongxina3595 if the hand is invisible, how can you tell if it's doing anything?

Yeah my econ professor would misrepresent real world events to fit his narrative. At least he wasn't like my other professors who gave a bad grade for disagreeing with them on topics like social security, medicare, minimum wage, etc. I did enjoy his class because he appreciated when students would disagree with him, and would fight against his views. Other than his misrepresentation of certain facts (which was probably not malice, just confirmation bias), he was actually one of my best professors.

exactly! to say that it is a common sense thing taught in middle school and show his error of not knowing the simple concept of rounding, a concept taught in 3rd grade, does have me raising an eyebrow

@@redopal9796 you didn’t understand him. The … means the number is truncated not rounded. If you don’t have a … at the end you don’t round. Rounding before a … doesn’t make sense. That’s the idea, not that he doesn’t understand rounding.

​@sepro5135 Yes, but sig figs *enforce* a rounding rule; which both business and science courses require. As in, your data will be thrown out if you do not follow the rule. Basically, Euclidean math is severely flawed and causes some jobs to require set rounding rules. It's one of my major gripes with modern mathematics.

​@@Xdgvy wtf is euclidian math? If you are talking about euclidian geometry, it has nothing to do with rounding

@@HunsterMonter Euclid's elements, specifically five and 7-10 (if my memory is correct), do deal with numbers; including prime, rational, and irrational. They are the basis for our system.

I was taught this method of rounding past 3 decimals as well but also think removing 5% for it is incredibly silly

The issue is the conflation of two different methods of reporting an answer. With the ... (ellipsis) then you aren't expected to round as you are reporting that more is to follow, whilst if you don't include that, then you are expected to round, though you often need to report it with a note to the effect of "to 3 decimal places" so it's clear what you've done. The professor seems to want him to do both.

@@ChevronTango : For all we know, the professor's redpenning covered / was intended to cover the ellipsis too, not just the "2", but this doofus didn't notice / understand that.

@@ChristianConrad If it was intended to cover the ellipsis, then it shouldn't have been corrected to "3..." and instead to "3".

@@maxwellsterling : I don't think it was corrected to “3...” I think it was corrected to “3”, and the “..." were Jeff's original ones which either were sloppily crossed out, or not at all.

modulus vs algebraic division war commencing

As the resident idiot who failed all these classes then self-taught statistics, probabilities, and permutations ENTIRELY to learn which games I could rig into my favor at casinos and carnivals. ...Wouldn't the answer be 1? Like, you split 4, four times... I have four apples and four friends, I give each friend one apple... how many does each friend have... WHAT?!

​@@Ultrox007 nope, apparently all the friends phase out of existence

It’s a time signature : )

it's called HIGH school for a reason

I remember in my stats we rounded nearly all of our numbers. Statistics is already an, "arguable," set of numbers. Like on surveys people lie, or methods of gathering data may be flawed. So a .00000076 difference isnt going to make a significant impact. Certain types of information need different amounts of specificity, like if you are testing measurements of liquid, youd want like 5 decimals. Where as if you are counting descrete data, like one person, or one cat, you cant have, "half a person," that doesn't make any sense. So you have to make it the closest round number.

I've never seen someone just writing 0.342... to indicate that the number keeps going. Is this an American middle school thing? It's like such a normal standard to round the number throughout the scientific community

@@ryuuk4498 I've taught Physics, Mathematics and Computer Science, the only time I've seen it used is Computer Science in some specifics contexts, but even then it's usually for integer division (sometimes called floor). I've never seen a Physics or Maths course that would accept truncating answers.

@@sottonk , yeah, I'd think truncation would cause a systematic downward bias in calculations, and wouldn't expect to see it in real world application except narrow circumstances.

Bro is just navigating a library with the answers lol

That's not the case most of the time, i just think Jeff is insane, also business classes are fake

Only I think he said that the thing which was "in the bottom third" was his 78% score on a particular test. The real problem in all this misery was that the statistics and calculus in such school classes have nothing fundamental to do with economics, as I understand it. I have read Smith and Ricardo and Mill and Keynes and Marx and von Mises and Silvio Gesell and Henry George and Hayek and John Ruskin, and they rely on no such stuff.

I study economic science in Germany. Bottom third means failed here. I had a course which of 400 students who took it, only had 60 pass.

@@davidtownsend8875 Marx is GIGA-underrated

I have had eng classes where the highest grade was a 78. and no curve so you just have to be happy with the B

"variaty" yep, that's a fellow business major right there

@@injeraenjoyer4570 Funny that you've mastered criticism before punctuation. Next time use a dot and proper capitalization when making fun of some rando on RU-vid.

@@daveogfans413cool

@daveogfans413 the rejection of punctuation and capitalization in a casual setting is not only perfectly acceptable, but completely correct in its circumstance, business major. I'm right with you here in the dumb people boat. No infighting, only ribbing here

@@injeraenjoyer4570 Saying "rejection of punctuation" like you're making some kind of grand, insightful point about communication. There was a variaty of ways you could've said it without sounding cringe.

It also rubs me the wrong way that he’s talking about people in introductory courses. The intro course was probably just as easy for many other people in the class - and the people who struggle will not end up with degrees in economics.

Maths students are up there in smugness, only behind law and medical in my experience. Also, the engineering students I know (I studied computer science, but it was the same campus) all had the joke that physicists are just engineers who can't do math or talk to women. Everyone makes fun of everyone, it's the law of academia.

As a STEM major I dislike how smug STEM majors are. While there are certainly deadbeat business majors there are also plenty of chill ones because they aren’t smug a**holes who have a superiority complex over those that aren’t as smart as them. Like someone else mentioned, saying that students in introductory business courses are going to be running banks in a few years is ludicrous. Anyone not cut out for an introductory course isn’t making it through a major. I think these people would be suprised at the difficulty of more advanced econ courses (I have a brother who did Business Econ at a college that basically required regular econ courses.) Furthermore, many professions that Business leads into are very much work your way up the chain kind of jobs. It’s also important to note that many of those students are coming straight out of public highschools with extremely low standards for non-advanced classes. People need to notice the log in their own eye before seeing the speck in others, so to speak. On a side note, I found it funny how the video creator couldn’t fathom that a professor would want him to round in a pretty standard way😂.

@@krkngd-wn6xj As a maths graduate, when I hear somebody who never studied theoretical maths saying he knows maths I will always react with smug "ohh, that's cute". But maths students usually recognize the fact modern maths is so detached from all other science and material words, that there is still gratitude for those apply the maths, regardless how spotty their knowledge can be.

Is it bad I'm uneducated on complex and even slightly higher level math near graduation for an accounting degree and potentially finance work? I hear it doesn't require complex math but I'm worried about being clueless if I need it

the only hard part about econ is remembering formulas and jargon.

Ask a macro econ professor to explain why the United States isn't a govt controlled economy, and use that as the litmus test for how drooling they are.

@@Zer0Blizzard "government controlled economy"? What are you on my guy?

​@@jacksonferguson2847 They are noting its not a command economy

⁠​⁠@@Zer0Blizzard probably because the U.S. isn’t communist and or doesn’t use a command economy cause they are the most infamously difficult part of establishing communism due to the fact the the amount of factors in a economy are almost boundless and individual economist no matter how intelligent wouldn’t be able to fulfill the wants and needs of every individual participating. This isn’t even a economics question it’s a political one like asking why didn’t the the Chinese nationalist just crush the communist during the long march. Their are to many factors such as the stock market existing the U.S. being founded with free market ideals and the Cold War causing the U.S. to double down on those ideals. Your question is 1 not their field 2 proposes a far fetched reality 3 is politically charged. If you asked me something like that I would look at you dumbfounded to due to the complete lack of relevancy.

Yeah, I took high school level physics and the first thing they did was teach us about significant figures.

Now I don't have to post this!

the presence of an ellipsis implies more numbers, meaning it's categorically incorrect to round the ones you already have

@@bayleev7494 Yes, but using elipses in that context is wrong.

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 how do you know? by the sounds of it, a lot of the practice questions were basic calculus and algebra. if it were one of those questions, they would not necessarily have rounding conventions. also, and more importantly, the marker seems to have said it would have been correct to write 0.783..., meaning your logic falls apart anyway.

That was hilarious

How they got in: “Donation to institutions is a form of free speech! 🤡”

Problem about this guy he did not took an Econ class or been on same class with econ students, he was in Business Econ, with business students.

lmao

truncation could allow you to quickly check with your calculator without rounding that the given decimal is actually the same as the fraction

Yeah like he could have added like the equivalent sign and rounded the number to 3 s.f.

Found the econ major

Its insane how delusional the video creator is; salted sour grapes, truly a cope and seethe experience.

How much maths is there in particle physics?

@@trollinape2697right now, I have taken up to vector calculus, am taking ordinary differential equations rn, have to take linear algebra and partial differential equations over the summer, and complex variables with applications sometime in the future.

In chemical engineering lab analysis, it's the norm to remove any "outliers", since there could be human error involved during tests

@@trollinape2697 a lot

​@@trollinape2697 Highly dependent on whether you work on the theory side or the experiment side. Both will require you to do physics PhD coursework, so you'll definitely need to know graduate-level maths while getting the degree, since almost all physics coursework is theory. (Of note for folks that want to search for more info, "particle physics" and "high energy physics" [HEP] are used pretty exchangeably these days since most particle physics is done at high energy collider experiments). In practice, Particle Theory is the continuation of the PhD coursework. My understanding is that knowing things like group theory, Lie algeabras, and other advanced maths is critical, as this is the foundation of quantum field theory, (which, itself, underpins all of modern particle physics). I'm sure the maths specializes as you begin to focus on a specific thesis project and career interests. On the experiment side (where I currently am), it's a mixed bag. Phenomenology is a very theory-adjacent subfield where physicists will model how specific theoretical particles will decay/interact with specific detector components and try to understand the specific signatures there. My understanding is there's a lot of field theory used here, too. Doing physics analysis from collision data (or calibration work, or precision measurements), you will typically learn a bit of quantum field theory at the PhD level, but the research is mostly statistics. My thesis is a particle search analysis and I haven't touched actual particle physics in a few years (and need to go and review things like the Feynman rules, etc for my defense). I still do a lot of math, but mostly I do statistics calculations and I write programs, so the computer actually does the math. Still need to know how to do the math, though, to know what you need to calculate. Most important things to understand are Bayesian statistics, likelihood functions, and how maximum likelihoods are calculated. Also, propagation of uncertainties, and knowing how to calculate both statistical and systematic uncertainties is key. Then you have hardware work, where you actually build detector components, solder chips into PCBs, write firmware for FPGAs, etc. If you work with a group that does any hardware development work, you can get exposure to a lot of different projects. How much maths are actually used varies. I've never done hands-on hardware development, but usually you're involved in both the fabrication/testing as well as the design, so there will definitely be math used in the design portion. I have done some FPGA work, and that's all programmable logic and binary arithmatic, so you'll need to know at least some basic algebra for that. Most of the FPGA stuff is doing signal processing calculations, though, so that'll require calculus and an understanding of things like Fourier Transforms, etc. Overall, quite a bit of maths for particle physics. If you know the kind of work you want to do (and what skills you'd like to learn), it's likely there's a project in HEP that will teach you those and more. The trick is finding a group doing the kind of work you want!

the title of the video is correct

Yeah. Use "≈" and round the number. Never I have seen number being truncated in math. But I'm european, so it could be just one of those american things. Edit: Actually, I do remember using truncation in math, but that was in 3rd grade and we moved pretty fast over to rounding numbers and never truncating Edit 2: also "an inane rounding scheme", if you're truncating then you're not rounding so... huh? or are you saying rounding is too hard for you? Also truncating has the possibility to introduce bigger error than rounding

Yeah I would've rounded this way to

I’ve got a PhD in material physics, and I got the exact same reaction. Rounding to the appropriate amount of sig figs *is* the correct standard procedure, truncating the answer without rounding is wrong. I’d give some minor points off as well if a student handed it to me like that. Especially if they keep repeating the same truncating scheme in subsequent assignments.

.763 and ".762..." Should both be valid answers though, as the ... implies additional digits in the answer. So there should have been no markdown.

have... have you never taken a class with obtuse and impossibly harsh assignments/markers?

I had to learn about significant figures for my tenth grade chemistry class, and my teacher made it more annoying than it had to be, frankly.

​@@DiamondKingStudios yeah for sure... it's an annoying but necessary system to deal with

hate sig figs, damn near failed high school chemistry because of them

Hate sig figs

I lost so many points because of sig figs in high school. You’d think I’d make the effort to do them properly after unnecessarily lowering my grade, but I was still technically getting the right answers, and I didn’t believe that adding too many numbers to my answer could be a bad thing. That segment was exactly how I felt at the time.

It's not the degree that gets them the money. Most ppl with a business administration bachelors make around 60k. The ppl that make way more simply need the degree to access the jobs that daddy or mommy had already "found" for them

They fail up...

@@amistrophygot it People keep talking about “ these business majors” making too much . Most of them don’t make that much, 60k ish… I did two years of businesses and decided to switch because the people in my class were so dumb I didn’t want to be lumped in with them.

Operations research is the cooler operations management

Probably connections, simple as

If you're early on in the major don't worry, it does get better when you get into more applied topics. If you're more math minded try to get into a microecon class or econometrics. Any class on the IT side that will teach you how to use R or Python. Get into something like International Econ for less math but more "why does this happen" critical thinking. And for the love of god do an internship or two. You need that to get an actual job using your degree quickly.

@@FatherGoz thx your comment is really reassuring

I’m glad that where I’m majoring in Econ doesn’t have a business school

Like the other guy said the classes tend to get actual meat on their bones later on. There are some genuinely hard classes in Econ majors later on, especially if you have a somewhat tough econometrics prof. Money and Banking for example was ROUGH, or I'm stupid idk. There are still some baby easy electives at higher level though - game theory was baby easy for me but pretty much EVERYONE got bad grades on those tests somehow. Your peers will kinda get better too. Some who weren't ready for it select out and you will learn which ones are worth hanging around, either because they try even if they're not smart or they're smart and can help you with things too As a double major in Finance and Econ about to graduate, things are the same way on the Finance side too. I've had amazing classmates that I would want to be friends with if I wasn't busy with my own. Group projects are the worst though. I also had a guy who did literally nothing for a large chunk of the class in my 2-person group project based class last semester. It close to ruined my homecoming and semester because of the work that got shipped off to me. He later put on his resume that he put 40 hours a week into THAT ONE CLASS, and got into law school with that banger experience -.- Anyway try to take the non-business version of classes if your schedule allows, and diversify your classes. My program let me take a bunch of math (not enough for a minor though), stats, and some Python along the way. Your bosses will be impressed by the fact you know what an integral is (this really happened at an internship, it's not a theoretical), or you'll be a bit ahead of the curve for grad school if you go that route, if you know about Finance at all I'm doing CFA level II right now and really happy I did some of the "harder" electives before it Anyway I was bored and typed this hopefully you find some fulfilment in your major and make money

Omj nombinary najimi pfp hello sibling!!!!!

(my first instinct was to type "NERD") I think that fun part is a lot better used by things that aren't just an economics degree.

tbf as an econ major a lot of my major classes were pretty bad too. I think all of the social sciences suffer from really awful intro classes that straight up teach myths and completely sidestep explaining method. You have to get to upper level stuff and econometrics for it to get good.

@@user-li4ye8nn4c I’m not too sure how your school is. At mine, ALL business students have to take 2 Econ classes. Many students struggle with these classes because you’re right, the early classes throw a lot of hoopla at you with little to no math and expect you to just believe everything they say. By the time in your undergraduate you reach econometrics, you’re working beside the schools PHD candidates, as it’s a prerequisite for them to enter into their programs. Vast differences from where you start your degree and where you finish it with ECON. That being said, we still sound like lunatics anytime someone says anything about present value.

Believe me, it's the intellectual bankruptcy of your discipline that's permitting the drooling idiots in business schools to justify their conclusions.

@@connor9024 Basically arts courses seem to be like this. History 201 is so much easier than my girlfriends 400-500 level history courses, it's actually shocking. Everyone takes HTST201 and is like "oh history is easy" then in one course my partner ended up writing 1500 words a week. Same happened to me with Econ, 201 was an easy A, now I'm doing econometrics, intermediate micro and macro and about half the class for these courses (and the ones after) will drop out.

Yup, 781 / 1024 = 0,7626953125. So there is definitely a good reason too round up. You often need to be as exact as possible

@@alfredwaldo6079 No, "..." means truncated, not rounded.

@@ethanrutevillarreal1506 yeah

Sure... if the dots werent there. You dont round and THEN put dots after it, cause then thats just an objectively different answer. Realistically jeff shoulda just rounded, but also rounding 2/3 to .7 is criminal.

@@adbon6279 i mean thats what sig figs are for, you have a system to determine if you round from the tenths, hundredths, or whatever place and its consistent. ok normal rule of thumb i learned in stats is to go 4 places past the decimal point so you can say 76.27% in this example instead of 76.3% and the whole thing with the dots is just objectively wrong but there is a system (that the prof only half followed)

And? A lot of people pronounce it that way

Normal people just write 1

Cmon bro its Just a number maybe its not correct but you can understand what he meant

Facts. Dude I hated Econ. Got an A- on it SOMEHOW even though I thought I failed it. The econ that I learn in class, is nothing like the Econ I learn from RU-vid. I thought I was gonna be learning stuff like Bachelier processes. Maybe some cool math shit. But nah.

@@honkhonk8009"Cool math shit" You are so incredibly deserving of your engie pfp.

That fact that you can’t distinguish between economics and finance is maybe why you got an A-, not because of the class being stupid

Yes boss, you want to me to round this way, fine whatever. If they want to round to 3 sigg figs, I write out 4 sig figs, then round to 3.

@@SeaScoutDan As an EE I can safely say they round stuff worst than engineer and physicists. An engineer would round up to a nearest decimal according to their calculation - pi = 3, e = 2, and g = 10, a physicist would round up to get an order of magnitude - assume the cube is a sphere, and econs round up to the nearest non-scary-looking number

f(x) is f times bigger, so ∫xf(x)dx = ∫x(f+1)dx = (f+1)∫xdx = f+1

@@raspberryjam Is that assuming x=1, or does this work in the context of x being any type of function or value?

@@raspberryjam that's... not how that works

@@raspberryjam Can't tell if this was supposed to be a funny meme

@@raspberryjamCan’t believe you forgot the + C. Rookie mistake.

Can't say I've seen anyone write ⅔ = 0.7... before. ⅔ ≈ 0.7, sure. But never with the "..." (To be clear, I would happily write ⅔ = 0.66..., and use "..." notation often for intermediate steps of a calculation)

in my analytical chem classes they tell us how many significant figures they want, idk if the econ prof was doing that.

@@camicus-3249 yeah honestly the ≈ came up a lot more, I saw the ellipses in early science classes but only until we'd covered significant figures.

​@@rez505exactly this, I've never seen the ... used in proper calculations before

id assume that if a number ends in “…” it would be truncated and not rounded. (would be weird to round if you are saying there are more digits after. the point of rounding is to cut it off)

It is not even that. The problem is that he took a business class and is confusing that with economics.

@@steventaylor2028 He never specifies so it's hard to tell through the rant in the video lol

Cope, econ and biz students are brainlets, and they're courses for neanderthals. Took a 2nd year FINC course and it was literally maths you do in Grade 10 🤣🤣🤣

@@SI-fv7gc Finance is not on any economics track lmao, your ignorance is showing

@@SI-fv7gc gigacope, bro never took micro theory or metrics

Yeah same, I was kinda looking at getting an econ major with a business emphasis but one semester in a business communications class was enough to push me away from anything business related.

youre so mathematically illiterate you dont know what a recurring decimal is or how to notate it...

@@AstridFrost-rc7wf you shouldn't be using a recurring decimal when rounding

@@APaleDotIts a stats class, he should round

@@hens0w Yeah, I didn't say otherwise

What's wrong with explaining what a logarithm is?

@@benzemamumba idk where you live but in my country school has 13 grades and you learn logarithms in 8th grade. You can barely do anything without them in the calculus portions of the five years of mandatory maths classes that follow before you can even begin to attend university, and it keeps coming up in physics and chemistry class as well. It's one of the most basic functions there are, and you should really, really at least know the derivative and the power rules before taking university classes in advanced calculus. It's like taking an astronomy elective and not knowing about the moon phases

Exactly, you can't write 0,7626... in general. 0.12345 implies that the figure is accurate to 5 d.p. If I see that, I'd assume either you have super accurate measurement, or it's divided from very large numbers. This is misleading.

Physicists tend to not round unless it's absolutely necessary. But he was in an econ class, so he should've done it the way econs do it

Is this sarcasm

​@@redditastic6711 why would it be?

@@redditastic6711 You are *required* to believe it is from now on.

@@redditastic6711 in some videos of his he says things like "like and subscribe so i can pay for [x]" or something like that and he pays for his adobe creative cloud sub with youtube money

Yeah a lot of people don’t know this and its a little frustrating. Also tribalism in academia is getting out of hand imo…

Ah this explains my issue with the video. He probably took a business Econ course and decided the whole field was easy. This is a fair assumption but if he wants to comment on the issue he should be more informed. Our undergrad degree, unbeknownst to all the stem nerds is actually the highest paying degree as far career-net-worth goes, contrary to what the FLOTM majors think.

@@lwrcse-uj4oi its academias best kept secret ssshhh. Also econ phds yield extremely high earnings.

Was about to say this. People confuse economics and business all the time. Econ students at least those who go on to grad school usually are complete math nerds knowing proof based real analysis, linear algebra, probability theory, differential equations and are mostly able to do data analysis in R or Python. Not a small portion were double majors in math or physics, and they do not find the material easy. It is already dubious to base your view on a entire academic discipline on just a couple of introductory courses. But it becomes even more ridiculous when said introductory courses are not even really related to the subject. I don't know why people confuse business and econ so often. Maybe it has to do with the fact that many business programs teach a dumbed down version of introductory economics (i.e. "business economics"), or are simply using the term "economics" as a euphemism for their business classes. It is also the case that econ undergrad education in the U.S. is very often severly lacking in rigor compared to the undergrad education in European countries, maybe that is part of the problem. In any case, the correct title for the video would be: "I Took an Business Class and It Halved My IQ"

I'm an accounting student and I really don't get a lot of the higher level math talked about here, am I just boned or is this not relevant to me you think?

The issue is the rounded version still hass the ... implying that there is more numbers.

Im 99% sure he knows that but 0.763… makes no sense. 0.762… or 0.763 do. That’s the point he was making

Significant figures is enforced in some classes. 0.7627 probably would have gotten points deducted as well.

@@robincray116 Exactly. 0.76269 implies that the measurement has an accuracy of 5 d.p. while 0.763 implies that the measurement was accurate to 3 d.p. The former is misleading and deserves only a partial mark.

Every major has its own assumptions and paradigms that look strange to outsiders. I studied three completely unrelated majors. Humility and the Principle of Charity go a long way.

Exactly

this guy is a real piece of work

They are absolute shitlords and insufferable knuckledragging apes.

We have 3 mainstream accepted theories of the universe each contradicting each other and 2 mainstream theories to this which contradict themselves. Go figure.

@@AnonYmous-spyonmepls ...That's what theories are. You can theorize that you'll crash on the way to work or be just fine. The contradictory nature of both theories doesn't say anything about the theories themselves.

sauce?

I would hope so, unfortunately the vast majority of companies, particularly ones controlled by rich assholes, DEFINITELY want business grads.

Why? I'd assume companies want to hire smart people?

@@darkthunder301 Yes, that's exactly why they want to avoid people with an MBA background.

​@@anjoliebarrios8906source: trust me bro.

Well to be fair PEMDAS isn't accepted by everyone. Eg.: ab/cd = ((ab)/c)d according to PEMDAS, while a lot of people would say it is (ab)/(cd) It is a convention, that not everyone subscribes to. That is the reason for the debate about 6 / 2(1+2) = 1 or 9

​@@Teronix100There is no debate, there are the people who are right and those who are wrong, easy as.

@@SenhorAliennah not true. It’s slightly up to interpretation and so we are careful to be more explicitly in writing

@@Teronix100 , I wouldn't say PEMDAS isn't accepted per se. PEMDAS is correct as a convention and is used extensively. Rather, a lot don't understand that PEMDAS defines addition/subtraction and multiplication/division as equal in priority, an ambiguity. Parentheses exist and are the highest priority as they're used for disambiguation. It's up to the author to avoid ambiguous notation.

@@SenhorAlien , those social media posts about these are actually ambiguous, and both are right, since the author intentionally left it ill-defined. It's a great viral tool for them, since people will debate each other endlessly.

No child left behind is hilarious

Yeah I was wondering about that too, wtf is going on with grade inflation in the US?

Some people pronounce the first bit at "lay", others as "lar", but both point and laugh at people who don't pronounce the "x" as a "k".

@@xinpingdonohoe3978 Or pronounce the chi as a chi!

Lol polar opposite for me. I fucking looooved calc but took a discrete math course and got ass grades

​@@honkhonk8009 which of your 11 hard science PHDs was the one that you sucked at, Dell?

Report her to admin, and get as many people as possible to complain simultaneously. If possible, involve your parents and others parents. If you can find evidence of bias where similar work by you and another person were given different grades for petty reasons then she’ll be given a headache at the very least. Don’t take this lying down, it’ll never get better if you don’t complain above her head.

@ianrau6373 nah, she hates everyone in my class equally. Also I go to a private school, so what's right isn't what happens. She knows people, and she's been here a few years now, which is longer than I have been. I'll just be labeled as a troublemaker and expelled.

if she’s doing it to everyone maybe she’s just trying to hone your skills? if the rules are consistent at least. personally i think english is probably one of the most important classes you can take as a senior. being able to write well is good for any job

Give us some examples, that way we can know you aren’t lying. Just out of reasonable doubt

@@chesspiece4257 I personally find English classes one of the easiest for teachers to teach you rules and the likes that are completely and utterly useless, such as the so-called 'split infinitive'. And, perhaps another one would be marking down students who use phrases that don't form a complete sentences by themselves. I mean, phrases are used everywhere for emphasis and effect-newspapers, letters, books, etc.-that teaching them it's ungrammatical hurts their writing and is also wrong. For example, this excerpt from a novel, "Our lives took the forks and turns and twists into our own paths-into dark forests that sometimes felt impossible to survive. All leading to this moment. (Here, the phrase solely consist of a gerund-participial verb, which does not, in a traditional sense, meet the requirements for a sentence.)" Or maybe the 'rule' that conjunctions such as 'And', 'But' or 'Or' can't be used at the start of sentences. For example, this excerpt from another novel, "...spilled out in tears and screams and in heavy, pulsing silence. And somehow, as much as I hurt, I knew it was even worse for Dad." Revisions: *For your convenience, some missing words have been added back in. Some stupid issue with italics and bolded letters being deleted. And so there goes all the fancy formatting!

Lol huh? I think your professors might just be wildly strict

I think this might be European vs US system. At least this was my experience when dealing with some European and some American students.

That's not how that works. If you can't get above 80 then 80 should be 100

@U20E0 that is not how % work.

@@emilsinclair4190 i mean that's not how grading should work. If no-one's getting above 80 that means the test is too hard.

I mean, I understand it not being the highest grade, but bottom third?? What kind of statistic classes are you getting? Everyone passes with an A???

​@justsomenightowl7220 the *exam grade* (the 78%) was bottom third of the class, not his final grade of that whole class, which was a 92.5%

Yea, the english system is way harder. I cant speak for the university level, but i did both high school in an english and canadian system. I was laughing with every math question in the Canadian system and averaged a bit over 90%. Which is also harder than the US system by the way. Whereas i was fighting for over 70% in the English system. I used to think i was just retarded, then i realized why Americans think they are so smart!

​@@justsomenightowl7220No, it's all graded on a curve, so it's as unlikely for someone here in the UK to score 75% as it would be someone in the US scoring 95%. Basically you can lop off the remaining 30% because unless you found and answered the secret, hidden questions, 70% is 100%

@@josephvictory9536it’s funny though how England performs considerably worse in OECD testing, then both Canada and the US. Complicating math doesn’t mean you learn it better.

if you round it, you no longer have the ellipsis, as there are no more digits after your rounding. That is literally the point of rounding.

@@TrevorHammill Right, so why was he answering with ellipses when he was supposed to round?

@@APaleDotYup, too stubborn to change

@@APaleDot the point he made in the video is that the professor corrected him to rounding AND keeping the ellipsis, which is clearly wrong. And also, without expectation of rounding, some people might default to just dumping the numbers. Not the way I'd do it, but valid if there's no other instruction.

​@@TrevorHammillI honestly don't understand this take, like, the professor didn't *write* '0.763...', he just corrected the number to be rounded because that's the correct answer. It's obvious what the mistake was, crossing out the ellipsis would make it clearer but it's unnecessary

He didn't round though, that's what the ... signifies. It means "the number goes on but I'm not writing it anymore". But different fields have different conventions of how to do stuff so it's completely fine if the professor wanted them to round, however the Prof should specify that

@@steffenjensen422 You don't read an economics article saying "The GDP grew by 3.333...%". We all know the measurement is not that accurate, and I doubt it even has 2 d.p. considering the millions of possible errors in data collection.

I think people saying economics classes use simpler maths than the grade X maths class simply missed the point. Economics is never about advanced maths. It uses simple maths to deal with complicated, largely human-made/influenced rules. An Italian language class would use even less maths, but no one would say it's easier than a grade X maths class. Of course, a class of any subject at MIT will be completely different from the same class at a community college.

​@@Y.Z-AuIt just means they haven't taken anything past intro level. Intermediate micro and macro both require calc 2

@@steffenjensen422 Who has the convention to write 0.323...? Is this an actual thing?