I would like to point out that I agree with this. I'm also not sayin the guy wasn't an idiot, just that being nice will actually get you somewhere.
Everything you read about how to get something solved with customer care involves two things: be nice, but be firm. The people you're dealing with have their own problems, and if you're a jerk, they're not going to care about your problems.
Ok, if you're going to ask for help on Slashdot, how about you leave your contact info so that if someone at Dell does read this, they can get a hold of you?
Personally, I work at a computer company, and most of the people I work with read/. Most of use would try to get your case# escalated, but we would need your contact info to do that.
Son of a bitch. I hit the preview button and still missed it.
The last line should say:
Sometimes, it's best to make use of the correlation without worrying about causation (My argument is pretty much that in the old phrase "correlation does not equal causation" that the mathematician follows the correlation bit, and the physicist follows the causation bit)
"You will not make it very far as an actuary, for example, if you do not understand at least the basic physics of what happens when someone experiences an automobile crash or a myocardial infarction"
That's not a very good argument. It's just as easy to argue that the Actuary with a basis in Physics will fail because he/she keeps trying to make everything fit a model that makes sense, instead of just letting the numbers speak.
Sometimes, it's best to make use of the correlation without worrying about causation (My argument is pretty much that in the old phrase "correlation does not equal causation" that mathematicians follow the causation bit, and that physicists follow the causation bit)
Math isn't so intuitive for me, but I like Feynman's different approach. It's a good supplement.
And as far as enjoyably reading a text is concerned, nothing but Griffiths. I actually enjoy reading Griffiths's texts. (I've got each)
A few things on Feynman: 1. I think he may be a mathematician at heart. 2. My mathematically inclined friends liked him more than Griffiths (which tells me that Griffiths is the physicist whereas Feynman is the mathematician) 3. Feynman taught undergrad at Caltech. You need pretty good math just to get there.
I just thought of another one. It's Mathematical Methods for Physicists by Arfken. I wouldn't necessarily recommend buying it, but find one you can flip through (most university libraries have it, as do most math/physics department libraries. and I can almost guarantee that someone you know has this book).
It's a math text, but since it's geared as a math text for physicists, the explanations may have the right amount of physics in them.
(I've always liked it as my math reference).
Though, I don't think this will be at your level (probably below), but it may help with the ground work. As I said, don't buy it, but find a copy to flip through.
You're right. Because *everything* that a person needs to know about PDEs is taught in that undergrad class. This must be some sort of joke! The outrage!! We shall not stand for this!
Of course, the other option (even though it's completely ridiculous) is that--like most colleges--there is more than one level of PDE class, just as there is more than one calculus class. But I know, it's crazy (that's why we threw that out at the start!)
If you want something more specific, to a topic, there will be a slew of books. I found some pretty good ones following links on Amazon from one to another and reading reviews.
You're right. Because most carriers don't charge you to listen to your voicemail, and being able to have messages left when your phone is turned off is a stupid feature anyway.
A microwave oven works because the frequency it uses is at resonance with one of water's molecular frequencies. If it's a little off, it doesn't work.
So with phone frequencies being 800MHZ, 900MHZ, 1800MHZ, and 1900MHZ; and a microwave oven being at 2450MHZ, it's far enough away that the Microwave Oven analogy is damned poor.
I think that one of the advantages that Excel has is that you can visually plot relationships. When you're building a complex computational spreadsheet, it's difficult to keep track of what's where. Excel gives you another way to keep track of everything. In addition to variable names and comments, you've the visual geographic element. You may need to do something to a specific variable, but you can't remember its name but you can remember where it's defined.
When doing complex computation, having a better understanding of the structure that you're building can be of immense value.
Iowa State's Physics department doesn't require any programming course. It's just sort of assumed that you'll pick it up on the way
As far as using a language for computation is concerned, I've always felt that Mathematica is a powerful tool (great programming functionality along with the built-in math & physics functions makes it a logical choice. Along with the $50 student price tag).
You may argue that Mathematica isn't a true programming language, and I'd agree. But it gives you everything you would need for computational physics.
It really depends on the reception that you can get in your home. The only way to know for sure is to try it. I'm pretty sure that all the service providers have a 15-30 day trial period in which you can cancel without huge fees.
Correlation does not prove causation. And with such small deviations, it's hard to believe that any results are outside the margin of error of the experiment.
Also, will the new iPod classic support higher resolution of video? The 160GB makes much more sense if you could buy a dock that will have HiDef outputs. Or even just a Dock to HDMI cable.
Slashdot Mirror
I would like to point out that I agree with this. I'm also not sayin the guy wasn't an idiot, just that being nice will actually get you somewhere.
Everything you read about how to get something solved with customer care involves two things: be nice, but be firm. The people you're dealing with have their own problems, and if you're a jerk, they're not going to care about your problems.
I don't think that means what you think it means.
Abstinent: self-restraining; not indulging an appetite especially for food or drink; "not totally abstinent but abstemious"
I live in Austin, TX, and let me tell you: I can guarantee that 'abstinent' does not fit most Dell employees.
Filipino and Canadian.
Ok, if you're going to ask for help on Slashdot, how about you leave your contact info so that if someone at Dell does read this, they can get a hold of you?
Personally, I work at a computer company, and most of the people I work with read /. Most of use would try to get your case# escalated, but we would need your contact info to do that.
No.
I've always been of the opinion that if you're a jerk to me, I don't need to out of my way for you.
Son of a bitch. I hit the preview button and still missed it.
The last line should say:
Sometimes, it's best to make use of the correlation without worrying about causation (My argument is pretty much that in the old phrase "correlation does not equal causation" that the mathematician follows the correlation bit, and the physicist follows the causation bit)
"You will not make it very far as an actuary, for example, if you do not understand at least the basic physics of what happens when someone experiences an automobile crash or a myocardial infarction"
That's not a very good argument. It's just as easy to argue that the Actuary with a basis in Physics will fail because he/she keeps trying to make everything fit a model that makes sense, instead of just letting the numbers speak.
Sometimes, it's best to make use of the correlation without worrying about causation (My argument is pretty much that in the old phrase "correlation does not equal causation" that mathematicians follow the causation bit, and that physicists follow the causation bit)
I think that is somewhat the point as Quantum Mechanics is pretty much a Grad class and Griffiths writes for undergrads.
I will agree.
Math isn't so intuitive for me, but I like Feynman's different approach. It's a good supplement.
And as far as enjoyably reading a text is concerned, nothing but Griffiths. I actually enjoy reading Griffiths's texts. (I've got each)
A few things on Feynman:
1. I think he may be a mathematician at heart.
2. My mathematically inclined friends liked him more than Griffiths (which tells me that Griffiths is the physicist whereas Feynman is the mathematician)
3. Feynman taught undergrad at Caltech. You need pretty good math just to get there.
I just thought of another one. It's Mathematical Methods for Physicists by Arfken. I wouldn't necessarily recommend buying it, but find one you can flip through (most university libraries have it, as do most math/physics department libraries. and I can almost guarantee that someone you know has this book).
http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Methods-Physicists-George-Arfken/dp/0120598760/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226903092&sr=1-5
It's a math text, but since it's geared as a math text for physicists, the explanations may have the right amount of physics in them.
(I've always liked it as my math reference).
Though, I don't think this will be at your level (probably below), but it may help with the ground work. As I said, don't buy it, but find a copy to flip through.
You're right. Because *everything* that a person needs to know about PDEs is taught in that undergrad class. This must be some sort of joke! The outrage!! We shall not stand for this!
Of course, the other option (even though it's completely ridiculous) is that--like most colleges--there is more than one level of PDE class, just as there is more than one calculus class. But I know, it's crazy (that's why we threw that out at the start!)
Here's a good thermal book I used in my Undergrad.
http://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Physics-2nd-Charles-Kittel/dp/0716710889/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226902024&sr=8-1
Also had a bit from http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1031405&op=Reply&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=nested&pid=25782785
It wasn't too bad.
Hard for me to say if either of those are really "good" texts as I hated Thermal.
They Feynman Lectures on Physics would probably be a good place to start. It'll be basic to advanced.
http://www.amazon.com/Feynman-Lectures-Physics-including-Feynmans/dp/0805390456/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226900482&sr=8-2
If you want something more specific, to a topic, there will be a slew of books. I found some pretty good ones following links on Amazon from one to another and reading reviews.
You're right. Because most carriers don't charge you to listen to your voicemail, and being able to have messages left when your phone is turned off is a stupid feature anyway.
OT: I just wanted to say that I like your use of an em dash instead of a hyphen.
You're an idiot and not at all interesting.
A microwave oven works because the frequency it uses is at resonance with one of water's molecular frequencies. If it's a little off, it doesn't work.
So with phone frequencies being 800MHZ, 900MHZ, 1800MHZ, and 1900MHZ; and a microwave oven being at 2450MHZ, it's far enough away that the Microwave Oven analogy is damned poor.
Science! It works Bitches!
I think that one of the advantages that Excel has is that you can visually plot relationships. When you're building a complex computational spreadsheet, it's difficult to keep track of what's where. Excel gives you another way to keep track of everything. In addition to variable names and comments, you've the visual geographic element. You may need to do something to a specific variable, but you can't remember its name but you can remember where it's defined.
When doing complex computation, having a better understanding of the structure that you're building can be of immense value.
In my intro classes, we were supposed to be using QBASIC. It works well enough, and is very easy for non-geeks to pick up quickly.
Later on (Particle Physics & Relativity), we used Mathematica, mostly because there's a great package that draws Feynman Diagrams for you.
Iowa State's Physics department doesn't require any programming course. It's just sort of assumed that you'll pick it up on the way
As far as using a language for computation is concerned, I've always felt that Mathematica is a powerful tool (great programming functionality along with the built-in math & physics functions makes it a logical choice. Along with the $50 student price tag).
You may argue that Mathematica isn't a true programming language, and I'd agree. But it gives you everything you would need for computational physics.
It really depends on the reception that you can get in your home. The only way to know for sure is to try it. I'm pretty sure that all the service providers have a 15-30 day trial period in which you can cancel without huge fees.
Get one, try it, then decide.
Correlation does not prove causation. And with such small deviations, it's hard to believe that any results are outside the margin of error of the experiment.
How does your comment deserve a +5 Insightful?
WTF?!
That was one good bag....
And God bless the videos of those people!!
;)
Also, will the new iPod classic support higher resolution of video? The 160GB makes much more sense if you could buy a dock that will have HiDef outputs. Or even just a Dock to HDMI cable.