<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Bing: 1 Slit Diffraction Example</title><link>http://www.bing.com:80/search?q=1+Slit+Diffraction+Example</link><description>Search results</description><copyright>Copyright © 2026 Microsoft. All rights reserved. These XML results may not be used, reproduced or transmitted in any manner or for any purpose other than rendering Bing results within an RSS aggregator for your personal, non-commercial use. Any other use of these results requires express written permission from Microsoft Corporation. By accessing this web page or using these results in any manner whatsoever, you agree to be bound by the foregoing restrictions.</copyright><item><title>404 - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/selection/</link><description>404 你似乎来到了没有知识存在的荒原 去往首页</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 14:33:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>1/1+1/2+1/3+1/4+……+1/n=？怎么个解法？ - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/question/46263998</link><description>红线是n-1到n的割线，绿线是n处的切线 图像上显然，割线的斜率大于切线的斜率。 所以我们有割线的斜率 \dfrac {\ln \left ( n\right) -\ln \left ( n-1\right) } {n-\left ( n-1\right) } 大于切线的斜率 \left ( \ln n\right) '=\dfrac {1} {n} 。 我们有 \ln n-\ln \left ( n-1\right) &gt;\dfrac {1} {n} 我们累加 \sum \left ( \ln n-\ln \left ( n-1\right ...</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 14:33:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>如何定义什么是 1？ - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/question/276303327</link><description>我们可以从数学上证明 1+1=2，但是如何定义 1 是什么。如果说是 0 的后继数，那又如何定义 0 呢？</description><pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 12:16:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Formal proof for $ (-1) \times (-1) = 1$ - Mathematics Stack Exchange</title><link>https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/304422/formal-proof-for-1-times-1-1</link><description>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?</description><pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 12:10:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>神秘新模型 HappyHorse-1.0「欢乐马」空降业内测评榜第一名，其表现如何？可能是谁？ - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/question/2025220640467152983</link><description>神秘新模型 HappyHorse-1.0「欢乐马」空降业内测评榜第一名，其表现如何？ 可能是谁？ 4月初，一个名叫 HappyHorse-1.0 的模型悄无声息地出现在了全球最权威的AI视频评测平台 Artificial Analysis 的排行榜… 显示全部 关注者 900 被浏览</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 14:19:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>False Proof of 1=-1 - Mathematics Stack Exchange</title><link>https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1901716/false-proof-of-1-1</link><description>1 Indeed what you are proving is that in the complex numbers you don't have (in general) $$\sqrt {xy}=\sqrt {x}\sqrt {y}$$ Because you find a counterexample.</description><pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 14:39:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>有问题，就会有答案 - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/?lang=zh-Hant</link><description>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。</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:20:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>1-1+1-1+1-1+1... 这个无穷数列的值是什么？如何证明？ - 知乎</title><link>https://www.zhihu.com/question/19952889</link><description>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。</description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 15:20:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Why is $1/i$ equal to $-i$? - Mathematics Stack Exchange</title><link>https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1277038/why-is-1-i-equal-to-i</link><description>There are multiple ways of writing out a given complex number, or a number in general. Usually we reduce things to the "simplest" terms for display -- saying $0$ is a lot cleaner than saying $1-1$ for example. The complex numbers are a field. This means that every non-$0$ element has a multiplicative inverse, and that inverse is unique. While $1/i = i^ {-1}$ is true (pretty much by definition ...</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 16:35:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Why is $1$ not a prime number? - Mathematics Stack Exchange</title><link>https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/120/why-is-1-not-a-prime-number</link><description>50 actually 1 was considered a prime number until the beginning of 20th century. Unique factorization was a driving force beneath its changing of status, since it's formulation is quickier if 1 is not considered a prime; but I think that group theory was the other force.</description><pubDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2026 00:47:00 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>