apples and pears are both fruit (which contain fructose) and the names given to the two key distributions of fat deposits on people.
the other point was that they are ordering their food over the internet and the only exercise they get is collecting the bag/s of sugar that get delivered at the door.
Fructose being 50% sweeter, you'll need 50% less. So, you'll be carrying 2/3 the weight of normal sugar from the door, to the spot next to the sofa where you keep the sugar for easy access. Hence, 50% less exercise and a reason for health problems.
fructose is 50% sweeter than normal sugar, and has a lower GI (that is it takes longer for your body to absorb it[you don't get so hungry] and more energy to break it down).
My point being, people who eat lots of ketchup and fizzy drinks seem to like to say that it's a very healthy form of sugar (the sugar that's in fruit) causing the problems, not the burgers and pizza they have with the ketchup and fizzy drinks.
and any other fruit with fruit sugar (fructose) in it.
Nothing what so ever to do with the life style and food choices of people who drink lots of fizzy drinks and eat lots of ketchup and getting fat because of it.
It must be that 50% sweeter than traditional sugar that has a lower GI and so you both need less and get less hungry and burn more calories digesting it. Maybe that 50% extra sweetness means that they only have to go down the shop 10 times a week to buy a kilo of sugar instead of the 15 times they did with cane sugar, so their getting less exercise, answering the door and doing TV internet shopping.
A circle can be expressed as something at which the probability of an something else radiating from a central origin.... whatever dependant upon if you class a circle in-situ.
That may or may not screw your mind. I could elaborate on whatever, and limits are probably! required, certainly induction. The central origin, doesn't mean that the radiant thing is singular, nor circular. The model is also dependant upon how you desire interference to be taken into account. I also didn't put dimensions or what the radiation is etc... it's just a pointer of how it could be expressed.
But as I said in another post, models based on set theory[the theory of mathematics, less category theory I think it's called] are bound to fail. After-all it's still a theory, surely they should try to make it reality before basing reality on it!
I think some physicist said about someone's super-symmetry theory, 'anyone who knows anything about set theory......', when dismissing it.
I'm not sure if he was complaining about the guys model, or emphasising the 'theory' bit in set theory. I expect the former.
A fool and his knowledge are easily parted. (parted by being replaced with a liberal amount of brain washing!)
I think current thinking is that the universe is a bit like a big string (which may itself be interacting with something that it not itself, a greater universe).
That is a 4d torus. So that could be seen as somewhat ballenced.
And for something like time it could always go forwards (so be asymmetrical in that way), but a lack of latent momentum through time could be, for instance, clock-wards or anti-clock-wards collapsed 'motion' [size etc..] through space.
any other variants to fit the symmetries, maybe random [radioactive decay as obvious time domain random] and other stuff too.
I think that wave function collapse is very hard to go the pre-determined/ infinite? dimensions route, like you could with entanglement. I'm not sure quite how that infinite dimensionality would work, or if indeed it is infinite, given that most things (I haven't done a massive amount of background) appear to be modal. i.e. light is modal, so when you send light down a fibre optic cable there are only so many modes it can take and this means that you can't in effect send light using an infinite number of entry angles because they will get collapsed into modes, it's quantum in nature.
(high speed fibre optic is single mode[I may be a few years out of date, so may now be single mode per frequency band], this give the highest binary bandwidth because multiple modes cause the bits to spread out due to bend in the cable. They tend to the highest entropy I suppose.
k = komplexity (with a k because complexity is probably not the best word, but nor is chaos because that's got a specific meaning.) t = time
k' = k^t for t 0 -> infinity
(here the crude bit is that it could be a curve that tends back to 1 or whatever and not exponential, and I've used k' instead of subscripting)
But it should be agreeable that when t = 0 k' = 1, but for any value of t the system would be 'komplex' [none simple].
so when t = 0, things are simple, at least in some way or other. And have greatest (possibly infinite, but that may be t-1!) entropy.
So, it would crudely seem that it is possible to find a simple feedback system that in it's essence is simple but in totality is irreducible.
chaos with a little bit of random thrown in would do it quite easily.
Things may tend to hawking radiation and space, though I'm not sure it's simplicity in 'real' terms would tend to simple or complex over time.
I do know that tending to and reaching the limit are different (often by order of power/dimension), but that's why I put in game theory, because the nash equilibriam could be related symmetrically the the limit of the tendency and such due to symmetry the relation is a balanced one.
I tend (usually) to pick the simplest (how do I measure that) method to deduce an outcome where I have more than one method and both methods produce the same outcome (the outcome's are symmetrical / identity, so are balanced).
so in the balanced system of outcomes you would tend towards the method with highest entropy, in the first instance. Occam's razor, in later instances you'd probably check all methods from simplest to hardest and then evaluate the nature of the simplicity between them dependant of abc, since some times one thing is simpler than another for a given case and then per case (or case of cases) go for the simplest, one with least residual work or highest entropy.
The don't mention her symptoms fully enough or how they applied the diagnosis criteria to say if it is 'autism' or something that is currently indistinguishable from it at this time given current symptomatic diagnosis processes for autism (if it ain't noting else it's autism seems to be the current UK way.)
It could also be plausible that the software is legal, but that the upgrades CTA has are illegal as they did not complete the upgrade process and destroy the old software.
Well, when I upgrade my car it's called part exchange.
Should Autodesk only sell upgrades to people who part exchange (send back) the earlier versions and then give a discount. Otherwise it's at full price.
'in mathematics there is the contemplation of pi and the impossibility of comprehending why it should be as it is, making everything based on circles or cycles forever imprecise.'
you can use algebra or symbolic representations. They can be precise for things like pi and circles.
Slashdot Mirror
I just want to install alarms... doesn't sound too hard, kind of work that pays loads, short term skills shortages. probably train you to do it.
nice little earner.
apples and pears are both fruit (which contain fructose) and the names given to the two key distributions of fat deposits on people.
the other point was that they are ordering their food over the internet and the only exercise they get is collecting the bag/s of sugar that get delivered at the door.
Fructose being 50% sweeter, you'll need 50% less. So, you'll be carrying 2/3 the weight of normal sugar from the door, to the spot next to the sofa where you keep the sugar for easy access. Hence, 50% less exercise and a reason for health problems.
fructose is 50% sweeter than normal sugar, and has a lower GI (that is it takes longer for your body to absorb it[you don't get so hungry] and more energy to break it down).
My point being, people who eat lots of ketchup and fizzy drinks seem to like to say that it's a very healthy form of sugar (the sugar that's in fruit) causing the problems, not the burgers and pizza they have with the ketchup and fizzy drinks.
what about using space, you get probability/analogue then.
one Atom and one Elise.
one F1 though should be enough on it's own, so long as your a mechanic.
nice flame.
So, they've got those darkies doing Quantum Mechanics now? still a step up from laying rail tracks I suppose.
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
What about those that are trying, why push a bad form of government on them?
The truth is, communist-anarchy is the best form of government (kind of self governance), through meritocracy.
also, the Amish don't seem to be doing too badly.
(dark body radiation!)
not but you can make a gniger counter.
area, umm....
Well they say there's going to be a shortage and it's going to take years and needs urgent action and people may die.
Because the moon has large supplies of isotopes that don't cause so much damage to the walls of fusion reactors.
and any other fruit with fruit sugar (fructose) in it.
Nothing what so ever to do with the life style and food choices of people who drink lots of fizzy drinks and eat lots of ketchup and getting fat because of it.
It must be that 50% sweeter than traditional sugar that has a lower GI and so you both need less and get less hungry and burn more calories digesting it. Maybe that 50% extra sweetness means that they only have to go down the shop 10 times a week to buy a kilo of sugar instead of the 15 times they did with cane sugar, so their getting less exercise, answering the door and doing TV internet shopping.
get a can of alcahol-butane mix, e.g. Lynx deoderat.
get a plastic bottle, not to big.
spray a moderate amount (not too much) deoderant into the bottle. (hot days are best).
wait.. a tiny while.
place bottle on ground
ignite opening
jet propelled bottle!
what a Ferrari?
I once went round with a bucket of money trying to give away spare change, in-case people came across someone needing it.
the systems are becoming more complex so you need more specialised people to do that.
Anyone know how that would sit with getting a green card from the UK?
'Maybe it says that we are beings who are intrinsically incapable of building an accurate model of anything.'
Westerns are set in the way of good and evil.
Cows go mu.
a way to get a circle in out of reality.
A circle can be expressed as something at which the probability of an something else radiating from a central origin .... whatever dependant upon if you class a circle in-situ.
That may or may not screw your mind. I could elaborate on whatever, and limits are probably! required, certainly induction.
The central origin, doesn't mean that the radiant thing is singular, nor circular. The model is also dependant upon how you desire interference to be taken into account.
I also didn't put dimensions or what the radiation is etc... it's just a pointer of how it could be expressed.
But as I said in another post, models based on set theory[the theory of mathematics, less category theory I think it's called] are bound to fail. After-all it's still a theory, surely they should try to make it reality before basing reality on it!
I think some physicist said about someone's super-symmetry theory, 'anyone who knows anything about set theory......', when dismissing it.
I'm not sure if he was complaining about the guys model, or emphasising the 'theory' bit in set theory. I expect the former.
A fool and his knowledge are easily parted. (parted by being replaced with a liberal amount of brain washing!)
I think current thinking is that the universe is a bit like a big string (which may itself be interacting with something that it not itself, a greater universe).
That is a 4d torus.
So that could be seen as somewhat ballenced.
And for something like time it could always go forwards (so be asymmetrical in that way), but a lack of latent momentum through time could be, for instance, clock-wards or anti-clock-wards collapsed 'motion' [size etc..] through space.
any other variants to fit the symmetries, maybe random [radioactive decay as obvious time domain random] and other stuff too.
I think that wave function collapse is very hard to go the pre-determined/ infinite? dimensions route, like you could with entanglement.
I'm not sure quite how that infinite dimensionality would work, or if indeed it is infinite, given that most things (I haven't done a massive amount of background) appear to be modal. i.e. light is modal, so when you send light down a fibre optic cable there are only so many modes it can take and this means that you can't in effect send light using an infinite number of entry angles because they will get collapsed into modes, it's quantum in nature.
(high speed fibre optic is single mode[I may be a few years out of date, so may now be single mode per frequency band], this give the highest binary bandwidth because multiple modes cause the bits to spread out due to bend in the cable. They tend to the highest entropy I suppose.
ah.. but you said in mathematics, not physics.
anything that involves inverse square law.....
So, what is this measurement you speak of?
Also, (very very crudly, but it should do)
k = komplexity (with a k because complexity is probably not the best word, but nor is chaos because that's got a specific meaning.)
t = time
k' = k^t for t 0 -> infinity
(here the crude bit is that it could be a curve that tends back to 1 or whatever and not
exponential, and I've used k' instead of subscripting)
But it should be agreeable that when t = 0
k' = 1, but for any value of t the system would be 'komplex' [none simple].
so when t = 0, things are simple, at least in some way or other. And have greatest (possibly infinite, but that may be t-1!) entropy.
So, it would crudely seem that it is possible to find a simple feedback system that in it's essence is simple but in totality is irreducible.
chaos with a little bit of random thrown in would do it quite easily.
Things may tend to hawking radiation and space, though I'm not sure it's simplicity in 'real' terms would tend to simple or complex over time.
I do know that tending to and reaching the limit are different (often by order of power/dimension), but that's why I put in game theory, because the nash equilibriam could be related symmetrically the the limit of the tendency and such due to symmetry the relation is a balanced one.
I tend (usually) to pick the simplest (how do I measure that) method to deduce an outcome where I have more than one method and both methods produce the same outcome (the outcome's are symmetrical / identity, so are balanced).
so in the balanced system of outcomes you would tend towards the method with highest entropy, in the first instance. Occam's razor, in later instances you'd probably check all methods from simplest to hardest and then evaluate the nature of the simplicity between them dependant of abc, since some times one thing is simpler than another for a given case and then per case (or case of cases) go for the simplest, one with least residual work or highest entropy.
The don't mention her symptoms fully enough or how they applied the diagnosis criteria to say if it is 'autism' or something that is currently indistinguishable from it at this time given current symptomatic diagnosis processes for autism (if it ain't noting else it's autism seems to be the current UK way.)
with an OS or anything else on it that's licensed as not for resale.
It could also be plausible that the software is legal, but that the upgrades CTA has are illegal as they did not complete the upgrade process and destroy the old software.
Well, when I upgrade my car it's called part exchange.
Should Autodesk only sell upgrades to people who part exchange (send back) the earlier versions and then give a discount. Otherwise it's at full price.
That would have been the correct solution.
'in mathematics there is the contemplation of pi and the impossibility of comprehending why it should be as it is, making everything based on circles or cycles forever imprecise.'
you can use algebra or symbolic representations.
They can be precise for things like pi and circles.
lets say:
0 = x^2 + y^2- 1
0 = x^2 + y^2 + z^2- 1
circle / sphere
pi: (could derive from the above)
Pi/4 = 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + ...
also:
e^(pi.i) = -1