uhm, condos are governed by strata rules that make all sorts of things possible. In the state with the weakest strata laws you can still impose fines for pretty much anything. These can then go as liens against the property if unpaid. Foreclosure can be triggered when they get too high. If you buy into a strata you agree to abide with various rules and regulations wether you read them or not.
Agreed. My building went through this a year ago. It came down to "Reliable, Safe, Affordable: Pick two". We have a very good condo management company and have a newish building that was wired when built just for this type of setup. But with bundled services, liabilities, owners having pre-existing contracts with other vendors and so on it was just not workable. It really needs to be done before the building is occupied to work.
What they really proved, at long last, is that gaseous systems are stable for small perturbations.
In layman's terms: the Butterfly Effect is bogus. It takes a very large perturbation to convert a stable portion of atmosphere into a storm, and the flutter of a butterfly's wings is not significant to tipping the balance.
What they really proved, at long last, is that gaseous systems are stable for small perturbations.
In layman's terms: the Butterfly Effect is bogus. It takes a very large perturbation to convert a stable portion of atmosphere into a storm, and the flutter of a butterfly's wings is not significant to tipping the balance.
Uhm, no. You do not understand what systems are modelled by the Boltzmann equation, what Lyapunov exponents are nor what "global in time solutions" actually are.
Lets pretend that the Boltzmann equation is a good model, on it's own, for atmospheric dynamics. This paper proves global existence of various norms of the solution, so that says that there is no time T less than infinity at which those norms become unbounded. Solution trajectories that start arbitrarily close are allowed to diverge exponentially in time. That is, there can be exponential sensitivity to initial conditions (ie. butterfly effect) with no violation of these results.
Someone above mentioned the example y' = y^2, y(0) = 1 which has solutions which become unbounded as t approaches 1 from below. These results rule out that behaviour but not behaviour like y' = y. Solutions here are bounded as t goes to infinity but are bounded for all bounded times.
Please, go back to grad school for a few years before claiming to understand what you clearly don't.
OK, why does this argument not also apply to teaching? I am paid to teach and do research from the public purse. My teaching is available to any one who meets certain standards and pays a user fee.
Access to data should be the same.
"Scientists" scared of goofy analysis are priests, not scientists. Take their funding away and use their PhD parchment for toilet paper.
Nonsense. I have much better things to do, like reading and posting on slashdot, than respond or deal with every crack pot who has an axe to grind but has no real idea how to do it. Seriously, you want to analyze the data? Go collect it yourself.
Ants, Bikes and Clocks is a wonderful introduction to applied mathematics via problem solving. Most of the material is calculus free. Students can learn an immense amount about how to approach problems and why they should study math at University.
I use this as a supplement in a 200 level modeling class as well as the main text for a section I teach to math high school teachers. I also leave the book with high school classes I visit.
It is very well written, approachable and filled with great problems and some hints on how to solve them.
Enjoy!
Even after that before you start bashing, ask who should be in charge of developing medicine - the government or industry?
Uhm, how about independent scientists? Why should scientific development exclusively be in the hands of profit motivated industry or ideologically driven goevernments?
Forgetting the password won't help. If I remember correctly the new law allows for jail sentences for failure to decrypt a message - regardless the reason. Technically you could be charged for receiving a message that you could not then decrypt.
What many people will tell you is that your supervisor is the most important reason to choose a school. You have to respect the work this person does and how they do it. You also have to get along with them in some way. What "get along" means is of course different for everyone.
If you are not in a hurry, then I would suggest doing a master's first. Then the first choice of school and supervisor is not so crucial. Plus, it gives you a chance to figure out exactly what you really want to do. Reading many papers and going to conferences is the only way to determine exactly what you want to do. As an undergrad not many people have an opportunity to do those things.
Doing a masters and then possibly switching means 5+ years whereas a direct PhD can be done in 3, so this route is not for everyone. But, having done a Masters first lets you discover who is doing the most exciting work in the area you love most. So, choose a good, braod, fun school to do a Masters and while doing it decide who to work on a PhD under, then just go wherever they are.
Slashdot Mirror
uhm, condos are governed by strata rules that make all sorts of things possible. In the state with the weakest strata laws you can still impose fines for pretty much anything. These can then go as liens against the property if unpaid. Foreclosure can be triggered when they get too high. If you buy into a strata you agree to abide with various rules and regulations wether you read them or not.
Agreed. My building went through this a year ago. It came down to "Reliable, Safe, Affordable: Pick two". We have a very good condo management company and have a newish building that was wired when built just for this type of setup. But with bundled services, liabilities, owners having pre-existing contracts with other vendors and so on it was just not workable. It really needs to be done before the building is occupied to work.
What they really proved, at long last, is that gaseous systems are stable for small perturbations.
In layman's terms: the Butterfly Effect is bogus. It takes a very large perturbation to convert a stable portion of atmosphere into a storm, and the flutter of a butterfly's wings is not significant to tipping the balance.
What they really proved, at long last, is that gaseous systems are stable for small perturbations.
In layman's terms: the Butterfly Effect is bogus. It takes a very large perturbation to convert a stable portion of atmosphere into a storm, and the flutter of a butterfly's wings is not significant to tipping the balance.
Uhm, no. You do not understand what systems are modelled by the Boltzmann equation, what Lyapunov exponents are nor what "global in time solutions" actually are. Lets pretend that the Boltzmann equation is a good model, on it's own, for atmospheric dynamics. This paper proves global existence of various norms of the solution, so that says that there is no time T less than infinity at which those norms become unbounded. Solution trajectories that start arbitrarily close are allowed to diverge exponentially in time. That is, there can be exponential sensitivity to initial conditions (ie. butterfly effect) with no violation of these results. Someone above mentioned the example y' = y^2, y(0) = 1 which has solutions which become unbounded as t approaches 1 from below. These results rule out that behaviour but not behaviour like y' = y. Solutions here are bounded as t goes to infinity but are bounded for all bounded times. Please, go back to grad school for a few years before claiming to understand what you clearly don't.
OK, why does this argument not also apply to teaching? I am paid to teach and do research from the public purse. My teaching is available to any one who meets certain standards and pays a user fee. Access to data should be the same.
"Scientists" scared of goofy analysis are priests, not scientists. Take their funding away and use their PhD parchment for toilet paper.
Nonsense. I have much better things to do, like reading and posting on slashdot, than respond or deal with every crack pot who has an axe to grind but has no real idea how to do it. Seriously, you want to analyze the data? Go collect it yourself.
Ants, Bikes and Clocks is a wonderful introduction to applied mathematics via problem solving. Most of the material is calculus free. Students can learn an immense amount about how to approach problems and why they should study math at University. I use this as a supplement in a 200 level modeling class as well as the main text for a section I teach to math high school teachers. I also leave the book with high school classes I visit. It is very well written, approachable and filled with great problems and some hints on how to solve them. Enjoy!
This has to be a hoax of some kind. I can't believe they let people this dumb teach math. Not to worry -- he is the computer science department!
Uhm, how about independent scientists? Why should scientific development exclusively be in the hands of profit motivated industry or ideologically driven goevernments?
Forgetting the password won't help. If I remember correctly the new law allows for jail sentences for failure to decrypt a message - regardless the reason. Technically you could be charged for receiving a message that you could not then decrypt.
Oh what fun!
What many people will tell you is that your supervisor is the most important reason to choose a school. You have to respect the work this person does and how they do it. You also have to get along with them in some way. What "get along" means is of course different for everyone.
If you are not in a hurry, then I would suggest doing a master's first. Then the first choice of school and supervisor is not so crucial. Plus, it gives you a chance to figure out exactly what you really want to do. Reading many papers and going to conferences is the only way to determine exactly what you want to do. As an undergrad not many people have an opportunity to do those things.
Doing a masters and then possibly switching means 5+ years whereas a direct PhD can be done in 3, so this route is not for everyone. But, having done a Masters first lets you discover who is doing the most exciting work in the area you love most. So, choose a good, braod, fun school to do a Masters and while doing it decide who to work on a PhD under, then just go wherever they are.