What a relief! Next time a J Edgar Hoover type is running the FBI and harassing Americans who are guilty of thinking differently, and I'm all upset, I'll just remember:
HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
The next time I'm pulled over on suspicion of being black in a white neighborhood, I'll comfort myself with this thought:
HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
The next time some guy gets sodomized with a broomstick by people who are abusing their authority, I'll remind people that there's no harm done because HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
I'm don't hate or distrust the government; overall it does a pretty good job. I do have concerns about handing excess power to individuals, whether they are presidents or rookie beat cops, because humans are flawed and make stupid decisions sometimes. Oh well, at least HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
The first made me a tech; the second is making me an admin. All the books I've read in between have been MS GUI crap or warmed over help files and TechNet articles.
(Yeah, yeah, I know it ain't Linux...but it pays the bills)
Kinda going off-topic at this point, but I found the most amazing book about a few years ago. There is a school that teaches languages to people by making them learn them all at once. They learn the vocabulary and grammar, and the written and spoken aspects of 8-12 different languages simultaneously. At some point, they decided that mathematics was a language and decided to apply their techniques for learning languagesto learning about mathematics. They wrote a book that starts with a fairly basic understanding of mathematics and takes the reader through a pretty decent (though not entirely rigorious) development of Fourier series. Arithmetic -> Fourier with a few stops in between, targetted at the intelligent non-math major. It was at my local library and I've forgotten the title, author, etc. Email me if you're interested and I'll try to find it again.
Anyway, in response to your question...I'm not sure you can explain these to an algebra student. You could probably explain them to a first semester calc student, though. (Don't know, never tried...)
I believe that Euclid's elements was, in fact, a textbook...oh, how the standards have fallen.
5 postulates (give or take a few) => 45 theorems.
Many modern geometry textbooks present a new postulate on every page. Awful stuff. "Hey, kids! If you begin with a huge mess of postulates, you can produce a huge mess of theorems!"
You weren't trolled, but you do seem to have missed my point. I wanted to take issue with the idea that you must DO mathematics in order to UNDERSTAND mathematics. I specifically chose an algebra student as my hypothetical audience. This student can't do calculus, but she can certainly understand what it is and what it does. I doubt a four-year-old would have the requisite understanding of slope and area to grasp what calculus is about.
There is no such thing as understanding mathematics without doing mathematics
Not entirely true. I can explain calculus to an algebra student very easily:
"You know how you can use algebra to find the slope of a straight line? Calculus lets you find the slope of a curved line. It also lets you find the area under the line."
I remember that...the tune was the old American stanby "Turkey in the Straw"
Re:Forget bigger numbers, how about smaller words?
on
More on Riemann Hypothesis
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Almost...
A) You can't predict prime numbers B) That guy came up with a formula that SEEMS to predict prime numbers C) A lot of money goes to whoever proves that the formula REALLY DOES predict prime numbers
Just because a formula SEEMS to work for every number you try doesn't mean that it REALLy DOES work for all numbers. The classic example
All numbers are less than 43 billion.
I call this "The Rinker Hypothesis"
Is it true? It seems to be..I tried 1, 2 & 3 and it worked. I tried every number up to one million and it worked. In fact, I tested the hypothesis for every number up to one billion and it was true for all those numbers. This example is rather trivial and silly, but it demonstrates the point: simply because a mathematical hypothesis (aka a conjecture) is true for every number you try doesn't mean that it's true for ALL NUMBERS.
Riemann's hypothesis seems true for every number they try, but they haven't proved that it's true for ALL NUMBERS.
Q: What's the difference between being British and being English? A: Ask the Scots...
=)
This is definately not legal, even in the US True...for now. A recent/. article discussed the RIAA's attempts to make it legal to DoS a P2P server that was illegally distributing copyrighted content. I was obliquely referring to this.
Is the registry entry in HKCU or HKLM? If it's HKCU, consider putting a reg file into the login script. If it's HKCU, consider the FOR command (built in) and the REG command (resource kit).
So when the RIAA kills a file-sharing server in Scotland because US law specifically permits it, and when they are indicted because UK law specifically outlaws it, whose national sovereignty will be degraded?
Um, Disney created Mickey Mouse The Brothers Grimm created Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella. Jeanne-Marie LePrince de Beaumont created Beauty and the Beast. Hans Christian Anderson created The Little Mermaid. Victor Hugo created The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
You didn't create it. You want to use it, make your own character. Disney doesn't do this. Why should anyone else?
If Disney wants to trademark their characters, find and dandy; that's what trademark law was created for. Copyrighting those characters in perpetuity is counter to the constitutional basis of copyright law.
Slashdot Mirror
"Well, next thing you know, you'll want to let blacks ride in the front of the bus, like that Martin King fella."
That's a great idea...but...it fails when the patent-holder is an individual and the violator is a corporation.
the evidence is useless in court
What a relief! Next time a J Edgar Hoover type is running the FBI and harassing Americans who are guilty of thinking differently, and I'm all upset, I'll just remember:
HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
The next time I'm pulled over on suspicion of being black in a white neighborhood, I'll comfort myself with this thought:
HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
The next time some guy gets sodomized with a broomstick by people who are abusing their authority, I'll remind people that there's no harm done because HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
I'm don't hate or distrust the government; overall it does a pretty good job. I do have concerns about handing excess power to individuals, whether they are presidents or rookie beat cops, because humans are flawed and make stupid decisions sometimes. Oh well, at least HARASSMENT IS USELESS IN COURT.
Who are you and where did you get my brain?
The first made me a tech; the second is making me an admin. All the books I've read in between have been MS GUI crap or warmed over help files and TechNet articles.
(Yeah, yeah, I know it ain't Linux...but it pays the bills)
Time to complete the job -2 Weeks /me ducks and runs
That's pretty cool...regexps let you finish jobs two weeks before you start them.
As is .sl.
That gives me an idea....
Sierra Leone
American Samoa
Dominican Republic
Trinidad and Tobago
Not a bad approximation. =)
Let's try this again...
P = 3.5amps * 120 volts * 10,000 computers
= 4,200,000 watts
Let's convert this to an hourly figure
E = 4,200,000 watts * 1 hour
= 4,200,000 watt-hours
Let's convert this to kilowatt-hours for simplicity:
E = 4200 kwh
The remainder is left as an exercise
Rampaging SUICIDAL sentient search engines are entirely possible, however, maybe even likely.
Kinda going off-topic at this point, but I found the most amazing book about a few years ago. There is a school that teaches languages to people by making them learn them all at once. They learn the vocabulary and grammar, and the written and spoken aspects of 8-12 different languages simultaneously. At some point, they decided that mathematics was a language and decided to apply their techniques for learning languagesto learning about mathematics. They wrote a book that starts with a fairly basic understanding of mathematics and takes the reader through a pretty decent (though not entirely rigorious) development of Fourier series. Arithmetic -> Fourier with a few stops in between, targetted at the intelligent non-math major. It was at my local library and I've forgotten the title, author, etc. Email me if you're interested and I'll try to find it again.
Anyway, in response to your question...I'm not sure you can explain these to an algebra student. You could probably explain them to a first semester calc student, though. (Don't know, never tried...)
I believe that Euclid's elements was, in fact, a textbook...oh, how the standards have fallen.
5 postulates (give or take a few) => 45 theorems.
Many modern geometry textbooks present a new postulate on every page. Awful stuff. "Hey, kids! If you begin with a huge mess of postulates, you can produce a huge mess of theorems!"
You weren't trolled, but you do seem to have missed my point. I wanted to take issue with the idea that you must DO mathematics in order to UNDERSTAND mathematics. I specifically chose an algebra student as my hypothetical audience. This student can't do calculus, but she can certainly understand what it is and what it does. I doubt a four-year-old would have the requisite understanding of slope and area to grasp what calculus is about.
There is no such thing as understanding mathematics without doing mathematics
Not entirely true. I can explain calculus to an algebra student very easily:
"You know how you can use algebra to find the slope of a straight line? Calculus lets you find the slope of a curved line. It also lets you find the area under the line."
I remember that...the tune was the old American stanby "Turkey in the Straw"
Almost...
A) You can't predict prime numbers
B) That guy came up with a formula that SEEMS to predict prime numbers
C) A lot of money goes to whoever proves that the formula REALLY DOES predict prime numbers
Just because a formula SEEMS to work for every number you try doesn't mean that it REALLy DOES work for all numbers. The classic example
All numbers are less than 43 billion.
I call this "The Rinker Hypothesis"
Is it true? It seems to be..I tried 1, 2 & 3 and it worked. I tried every number up to one million and it worked. In fact, I tested the hypothesis for every number up to one billion and it was true for all those numbers. This example is rather trivial and silly, but it demonstrates the point: simply because a mathematical hypothesis (aka a conjecture) is true for every number you try doesn't mean that it's true for ALL NUMBERS.
Riemann's hypothesis seems true for every number they try, but they haven't proved that it's true for ALL NUMBERS.
What's next is letting the US decide that if anyone named "DeBeers" steps on US soil, they are toast.
I suspect that no one ever stole content using punched cards. I do not deny the possiblity; I merely doubt that it actually happened.
+1 Bloody Hilarious =)
Do Do Do Do Fa Mi - Re Do
:)
The tune came back INSTANTLY as soon as I saw the words in the story. (sniffle)
Commodore had Bach's Two-Part Invention. Was there a tune associated with Apple II's advertising? (the Lemonade Stand song doesn't count
Say, can I plant an ob on you?
Q: What's the difference between being British and being English?
/. article discussed the RIAA's attempts to make it legal to DoS a P2P server that was illegally distributing copyrighted content. I was obliquely referring to this.
A: Ask the Scots...
=)
This is definately not legal, even in the US
True...for now. A recent
Is the registry entry in HKCU or HKLM? If it's HKCU, consider putting a reg file into the login script. If it's HKCU, consider the FOR command (built in) and the REG command (resource kit).
So when the RIAA kills a file-sharing server in Scotland because US law specifically permits it, and when they are indicted because UK law specifically outlaws it, whose national sovereignty will be degraded?
There's a big difference between SQL and DOS or RAID...VOWELS!
Damn, I hate the english system of units.
What do the English have to do with this? They use metric. =)
Um, Disney created Mickey Mouse
The Brothers Grimm created Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella.
Jeanne-Marie LePrince de Beaumont created Beauty and the Beast.
Hans Christian Anderson created The Little Mermaid.
Victor Hugo created The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
You didn't create it. You want to use it, make your own character.
Disney doesn't do this. Why should anyone else?
If Disney wants to trademark their characters, find and dandy; that's what trademark law was created for. Copyrighting those characters in perpetuity is counter to the constitutional basis of copyright law.