I changed my profile description to something witty, guys.
Cadance is much more insecure about her mathematics skills than most imagine; but why? And why is everyone so dismissive, like, seriously? Leave Cadance alone!
Soooo... yeah.... I'm a terrible not the best terrible writer, so pointing out errors/plot holes would be nice!
Page generated in 0.115 seconds
Total duration
1,021 users online
1,364,811 hits today, 1,822,946 yesterday
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Fanfiction
Designed and coded by knighty & Xaquseg - © 2011-2024
Support us
SubStar
Chat!
Discord
Follow us
Twitter
MLP: Friendship is Magic® - © 2024 Hasbro Inc.®
Fimfiction is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Hasbro Inc.®
I like it so far.
It seems to be canon that the average pony's grasp of mathematics is far superior to that of the average human.
wow the few first fanfics i read fully
Let me preface this by saying that this is a good idea. The idea of Twilight unintentionally dismissing Cadence's intelligence only for her to turn around and surprise her with unexpected depths. I think it holds a good message about never judging a book by it's cover, and appreciating the people around not for how you see them, but for who they really are.
That said the execution is a little... eh. I'll come out and say it, you make Cadence sound like a ditz. Admittedly, according to this story she started out as one, but you're having Cadence in the present talk like a ditz. She skips around, misses important details, and the unironic beginning jokes didn't exactly help with that image either.
Then there's this... thing in the background, I hesitate to call it a side story, of Spike walking in on Starlight Glimmer masturbating and they go out and have ice cream. I can feel my brain stretching trying to wrap my head around that little subplot. All in all I think that this is a good idea for a story, the execution just needs a little work.
Congrats on the feature!
Dat title though
Well, obviously. Math and crystals have so much in common, after all. It's only logical.
7274605
7275172
Thanks!
7275159
Thank you.
To be honest, I was really conflicted with how to execute this. I wasn't really sure how I wanted to tell the story, and I finally decided to just have Cadance herself tell it.
The impression that I always got from Cadance was that of a "Valley Girl." Reading the beginning jokes now does make it clear that those two images clash, so thank you for pointing that out. However, I did want to portray that Cadance is seemingly shallow with the way she conveys ideas and conveys her own personality, but the way she thinks is actually deeper. I was going for a "ditz", but I did fail. I won't lie that most of my own speech patterns went into Cadance's and that really showed itself when it wasn't just short phrases. But I also feel like that redeems the concept, in that she has more time to think about what she's going to say instead of just juxtaposing in "okay" and "like" to fill
the word counttime. In any case, I will probably revise.Thank you for the criticism, though.
But... dragons don't wear clothes, either?
Longest... Title EVER!!!
Apparently, Princess Cadance is also more well-read than anyone would have reasonably given her credit for. Just an all-around intellectual, that horse. A real Renneighsance pone.
y=c*exp(0.5x²)
Also, assuming f(x)=y, c=sqrt(9/e), which is approximately 1.819592.
You're welcome.
Please. Everyone knows that from some point on, higher mathematics entail dark magic. In other words, once you're good enough at math, dark magic comes naturally. Not the other way round.
Edit:
Rereading that sentence just made me cringe so hard in so many ways that I accidentally intersected myself.
Drive-by faves are not that much more meaningful than drive-by downvotes, however:
I don't know a damned thing about math beyond algebra. I watch Numberphile videos on YouTube in the hopes that it will make me smarter. So far, mixed results.
But damn, this title just speaks to me because I love the idea of a character having some vast knowledge of a topic that you'd never expect them to have (and in fact that's kind of a background joke in one of my long-runners [and also in fact the pony in question is doing calculus and then dynamic systems and chaos]), and for that alone you got the drive-by upvote and fav,
Also I will admit that I love long titles that pretty much tell you what you're about to read.
Also also I don't know yet if when I start to read I'll laugh, cringe, or just hear the whooshing sound as a math joke rushes right over my head, but I'm cool with however it goes.
I'm here because of this title. It is a mouthful, and I love it.
7276930 This will be addressed later
7277843 This comment really made my day. I will make sure to add this to my collection of horse puns.
7278342 I deny all accusations of witchcraft. This cannot be proven mathematically (because of it's circular nature).
7279527 Thank you. I hope all three of those things happen.
7278342 Oh, so someone else did solve this. I'd prefer to write it as: y = 3*e^((1/2)(x^2 - 1)). Personally I find it a little clearer, but it's a matter of taste. Feel like this should be in the main story page's comments, too...
To the edit, eh, I've seen worse descriptions of the Big Bang, I'm pretty sure. I can't think of one right now, but it's a pretty good bet that I have. XP
Assuming f represents y: y = 3*e^((1/2)(x^2 - 1))... which is in the comments to the first chapter, but since it's in the chapter title...
The technique of the two-sentence chapter is interesting.
However, I read part of the first 3 chapters and skimmed the rest: enough to tell that I'm not going to be sure what I'm reading... Might have to set aside some time for this one.
7288910
Then I ask you to carefully reread the quote, and to especially consider
as to why I might find it cringeworthy.
The meh description of the Big Bang is just trite in comparison.
I'm so lost. I can't understand anything beyond basic algebra.
7304014 I praise you for your honesty.
Maybe there's an open position as Princess of Grumpiness somewhere.
God that gave me flashbacks.
I don't get what that's supposed to mean.
7325860 Sweet nothings.
It does that anywhere.
Isn't Spike just a few years younger than Twilight?
text(I'm learning coding too using a program called Processing (an art coding thing). I know all about the commenting); //i dont want this here
text(thing. lol);
TwilightSmiley(
);
}
Oh wow it updated.
Everyone who has a tween/teen niece or daughter, get them to check out Danica McKellar's books and maybe study the Polgar Sisters or Ada Lovelace.
Also, screw Barbies or brushie horse toys. Get them an abacus.
Aw...
7325860
If prose can be purple, there's no reason grammatical elements can't be other colors.
Aristotle was probably on LSD when he wrote On Rhetoric.
Is this story taking the Alice in Numberland/Annotated Alice route?
That line from the Principia is every bit as immortal as Charles Babbage's legendary burn in response to a stupid question.
imgs.xkcd.com/comics/fetishes.png
imgs.xkcd.com/comics/proofs_2x.png
imgs.xkcd.com/comics/set_theory.png
Love the banter between Twilight and Cadance! Once this is done I'd love to see a sequel with them consulting Celestia on smiting techniques.
7278342 7288910
So how would you describe the Big Bang in 1-2 sentences? Use whatever jargon words you like.
7902070
7900717
I think I said I had seen worse descriptions. XP A worse one would be maybe like "stuff expanded from stuff and then it kept doing that." Not completely incorrect (so it still qualifies as a description), but pretty bad. XP
Let's try a better one... "By tracing back motion now, we can conclude that the universe was once all in a point. By how light changes over time, we can tell that it expanded very rapidly at first, like a big explosion or bang."
That's my attempt to incorporate why we think the Big Bang happened. To really do a more complete description, it would involve either more sentences or run-on sentences, regardless of jargon.
How did it even not physically hurt you to write that?
And you're a mathematician! 
7439166
12 is just a few years younger than 18.
7275159
This is a comedy piece, so I don't know why you seem to be harping so hard on the throwaway aesop. Cadance being a mathematician who talks like a valley girl, is the joke.
7276681
No it's not; mathematics isn't "deep".
But then, really, what is "deep" anyways? I'm getting the sense that we humans ascribe whatever discipline which serves no immediate practical purpose as "deep". Like art, or philosophy. But what we really mean is just that it serves no immediate practical purpose; it's just thinking for its own sake. So the question should be, is it valuable?
I would contend that it is. And that defending how it is valuable, is more valuable than defending whether it is deep.
7902126
25 weeks is my cutoff point for caring about comments left on this site. Besides which, no matter who said that, I now care a lot more about Sonic T. Hedgehog shippings than I do about that shipping. Primarily SonAmy and SonTails.
7902070
Not that I had any particular problem with the description, but...
Whatever jargon I like, you say? I'm by no means an expert, but I think I may have something neat and concise written down somewhere...
*interlude while I rummage through some notes*
There it is:
H²(t) = (da/dt a⁻¹)² = H²(0) ( Ωm a⁻³ + Ωγ a⁻⁴ + Ωκ a⁻² )
Here a(t) is the scale the universe relative to its current size, Ωm is characterized by nonrelativistic particles (matter), Ωγ by relativistic particles (light) and Ωκ by the space-time geometry of the universe (hyperbolic, spherical or flat).
Not a lot of detail, but that's cosmology for you. Things get very macroscopic, especially if you assume things like the weak field limit, homogeneity or isotropy.
F^-1 (x)= ln x + ln y, i think
Though something about that answer is feeling wrong
Oh damn its dead ?