Видео

Dude tysm you save me

Please how do I do this on HP windows 11 pro

GREAT VIDEO! Liked and subscribed ❤

BRO THANK YOU SO MUTCHHH!!!!! U HELLPED ME A LOT!

Thank you so much bro u saved me

its 8years ago but i face this problem after 8years of uploading the video

How can i Say Thanks to you.

I have a Synaptics SMBUS touchpad, and it doesnt have settings! can you talke care of tthat pls??

Four words. YOU'RE. A. LIFE. SAVIOR.

7 7 7 7+1=100solution

i went to mouse properties and the only options were pointer options, pointers and hardware... help

What if you want to get a square bracket??

Thanks that worked!

chain rule in 991es plus pls

thank you so much bro i finally solved it thanks to you

Thank you so much bro, I thought my this problem will never goo

You are wrong. Sir it's only two you can use

I tried in my calculator, step=0.1 and it worked. Awesome! Thanks

Can you fix the cursor on toshiba? becose im in toshiba and i Search it, and i see the [Clik to Change] Link and is not the same can you fix this and i Love your video.😉

Imagine how many invisible candies we have which where divided into 1/ infinite pieces

How would i do this on windows 11 on a hp laptop?

when i try to click dell touch pad settings it says that i have to open it with microsoft store butthen it doesnt work what did u use to open urs

Why won't you allow us to view the calculator sef

I think it's a colossal mistake to say 1 divided by infinity equals zero because you can easily demonstrate all finite numbers come out as equal by canceling out the common denominator (infinity). Examples: 1/infinity equals zero 1,000/infinity equals zero 1,000,000/infinity equals zero ...and so on forever. All finite integers can be made to appear equal if you assert the answer to dividing any number by infinity is zero. It's better to say it's not defined, but I think I can define it. The foundational problem I think is a lack of attention to defining how we depict the smallest infinitesimal above zero. That I believe is an error that had lead to many wrong conclusions. We always go from left to right when writing out decimal numbers. That is the core mistake in this case because you find you can always insert a smaller decimal number in between any two that you write out, then you fall into the trap as you realize it becomes imperative to show infinite places to the right if you want to show two consecutive decimal numbers. So doing it that way is impossible. This is the problem Cantor ran into and why he claimed the sets of integers and real numbers between 0 and 1 were not equal and that the latter was a far larger set. I feel that claim is an illusion caused by being drawn into realizing you are forever inserting decimal numbers between each pair you write out starting from left to right. This cannot happen with consecutive integers because even though we know the (unnecessary and invisible) digits to the left of any integer are also infinite, they are all zeroes and don't need to be shown. This makes it easy to show consecutive integers as it's possible to write out all places left of the decimal. With writing out places to the right of the decimal, a different method has to be used to make it possible to show two consecutive decimal numbers since for example .1 and .2 ARE NOT consecutive (infinite decimal numbers lay between) whereas integers 1 and 2 ARE consecutive (no integers lay between). The world of decimal numbers (stated to be the real numbers between any two consecutive integers) is an infinity in itself. That infinity despite what Cantor concluded contains the same number of members as the infinity of the integers. When you begin to write decimal numbers from left to right, what you are doing is starting out at the TOP that being the most significant digit instead of starting out at the BOTTOM that being the least significant digit. That is never done when writing out integers and would be impossible. If we had to write out all integers that way you would find you write out infinite zeros before you get to any non-zero digits. But we ignore the leading zeroes and that is OK to do with integers. That is not OK to do with decimal numbers however if you want to write out two that are consecutive. To demonstrate this properly and perhaps introduce a new concept, I propose that counting consecutive decimals be allowed to have the same structure as that allowed for integers, namely a least significant digit allowed to be at the right 'end' as is done with integers. This concept of the first (and smallest) decimal value above zero can be depicted as 0.000___1 where I am specifically allowing for an INDIVISIBLE 'end' digit of '1' after infinite zeroes. The next consecutive decimal value therefore is 0.000___2 and 0.000___3 and 0.000___4 and so on. (You never reach a number where the left side starts out as 0.1 but the point of this is not to make that necessary because you can already do the conventional decimal arithmetic. This is a 'special use case' that fits scenarios where mixing zero and finite digits and infinity is involved. It seems to apply only to that use.) ONLY if you were to allow for this method, you see indeed that the two infinity sets are absolutely, perfectly equal as I've eliminated the problem Cantor ran into with the real number set seeming to be much larger and you see why any integer (except zero) divided by infinity DOES NOT EQUAL ZERO. This prevents nonsensical results such as different numerators appearing to be equal to each other.

Divide in half, ignore remainder. Example: 27 27,13,6,3,1 reverse the order: 1,3,6,13,27 Then write below each number 1 for odd, 0 for even. Thus: 1,1,0,1,1 Answer: 11011 You're Welcome! ;-)

This works best for MSQ

YO YOU THE GOAT I FR NEEDED THIS VIDEO

1:30 Sir. What is the point in naming the terminals +ve and -ve when both have same potential.

Your a lif esaver man thanks🙏🏻🙏🏻

it happend to me again thanks man ima give u a sub

thank you

IT WORKKKKKKK YOUR A LENGEND THANK YOUUU

You are an absolute legend <3

thx so much

Thanks mate!

Thank you so much Sir!!!!!! it was heck i was not able to make ppts due to u its working u deserve a sub

thanks !! and for those people who are facing this issue on Hp laptops and have synaptic touchpad drivers installed... Go to Mouse properties and then goto Device settings and then click on the settings button then check for palmCheck-enhanced tap on it and then disable it.

i have a question: what the dog be doin

thanks very bro

thanks bro (not a bot)

On some functions it gives math error, e.g. on derivating x^2 sec(4x) but the derivation is 2x sec4x(1 + 2xtan4x). It gives math error

Ew old video

this truely solved my problem

when i click on additional mouse options nothing is happening what should i do??

thank you so much!!

Pls can you solve on non-ideal op amp? If the same 741 op amp in Example 5.1 is used in the circuit of Fig. 5.7, calculate the closed-loop gain vo/vs. Find io when vs = 1 V.

I literally learned more in these 5 minutes than in 2 full lectures of 4 hours in uni. Thanks!

thanks fixed on TOSHIBA it's called palm sensivity just settle it to .0

Thank you so much Sir!!!!!! You literally saved my day. I have no words to exclaim! Now I can play games on my laptop without any problem.

1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 and 20000000000000