My parents were both naturally good at math but in college one was an art major the other philosophy. They both took extra math and science classes as electives. So they had a confident but relaxed attitude towards math.
And on the last day of 1st grade, they put a bunch of surplus math worksheets from grades 2-4 out on a table, for students who wanted to take home something to look at over the summer. I took one of each home and completed them by myself, so the teachers didn't have a chance to taint me before I could figure out that it is actually all very simple, just following steps in order.
It took years of awful teaching for me to start hating math class, but I was never confused about it; I always knew I liked the math, just not the class!
Actual "math anxiety" that isn't just mislabeled social anxiety would be something you feel when doing math. That isn't what is described. What is described is anxiety that is related to being in math class, especially, being called on and having the class focus on them, or the pressure of taking a math test. And it seems to affect students who are good at math the most, which makes perfect sense for social anxiety, but not for math anxiety.
People who are good at math that encounter a situation in their daily life that benefits from a calculation, they don't feel anxiety, they feel empowerment. These are the same people at risk of anxiety in math class. Because the anxiety is caused by their parents and teachers, not by the math. If they think you're better at math, they're more likely to do the shit that causes the anxiety, too.
And the reason the parents can't help is that they don't actually do that sort of math as an adult.
If a parent can't read the book and understand it right away, they shouldn't even be trying to "help." Math is something that has to be exactly correct to be correct, you can't half-remember something from decades ago and start saying, "oh yeah, I know how to do that..."
You seem to have entirely missed the point what you quoted; the subject of what you quoted is not even physics. In the quote, "west wind" and "leaning" are not contextually connected. Whereas, what you replied to was referring to Newton's 3rd Law, which narrowly covers interactions between things.
And that said, yes, when you lean to the west, you do blow some wind that way.
But regardless, Newton's 3rd Law prevents cause and effect from having meaning when it comes to the action and reaction. Forces act equally due to the interaction. When you sway, and wind blows, the implication that you are swaying, and that is causing the wind to blow that is not true from a physics perspective. Perhaps it is true behaviorally, but physically it makes just as much sense to say that it was the wind pulling you over into a bend.
Interactions are guaranteed to be balanced, causality requires temporal separation and some sort of local imbalance.
Causality would be, the wind blew the tree (or the identical statement: the tree swayed in the wind) and then the tree fell down. Notice the temporal separation? Anything causal has to be over a temporal range, it can't be momentary. Whereas, the interaction between the wind and the tree is always in balance, there is no temporal component to those forces being balanced. Pushing and pulling describe the exact same thing.
This is with just two variables; in electronics it gets worse because you deal with Ohm's Law a lot, which instead of having 2 things in balance, you have 3 variables that you can measure, but that represent a single inseparable phenomena. If you think voltage and current are separate things, good luck getting transient spikes out of your circuits.
You actually need to take a look at the history of events to know, instead of just deciding what you think happened based on the feelies you have when you think about the names of different parties.
Li-ion wasn't proven to be cheap at scale yet when they made that bet.
That's what the story is about; they made decisions 20 years based on future predictions that were wrong, and they still aren't changing plans now even though everybody already knows they were wrong.
Presumably because of internal company politics, since the reasons they cite are so pathetic.
If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears it, the phenomena of sound still happened.
But if a bunch of switches on a computer are placed in a pattern, and it is never run through a DAC connected to a speaker, the phenomena of sound never happened.
If nobody has listened to it, and nobody has played it on an instrument, and nobody even imagined the sound of the notes while writing it, it seems hard to call the whole thing a "song." That's separately from the apparent lack of musically creative artistic elements.
Very little of it even rises to the level of a chime. Just as, a copper bell tossed into the ocean isn't a wind chime. But a pair of bottles tied to strings might be.
Flatulence is probably closer to music than most of the data generated; at least it made a sound.
Japan does have missile defense, and in a war in Korea, Seoul is the prize, they wouldn't want to nuke it. There isn't much else for them to shoot at other than Guam or Hawaii.
The whole "bombard Seoul to shit in 30 minutes" stuff is a load of math-challenged crap. They have n artillery pieces, but in a war they have to aim most of them at the enemy artillery pieces, or in the 30 minutes they don't even have artillery anymore. They have lots of artillery pieces, but the number believed to be aimed to Seoul is more like "dozens."
And if they did aim it all at Seoul, artillery doesn't destroy a city that fast. With artillery it takes continuous bombardment for months to level a city; in 30 minutes you're not even knocking down buildings. People moved away from the exposed side of buildings in the first few minutes, and are taking shelter on the far sides and in basements. You would have thousands of casualties, sure, but not millions.
It isn't like they can send waves of bombers over the city or anything like that.
Carpet bombing wouldn't be needed to stop it, they have computers that observe the artillery fire and calculate the location. Some of it is dug in, but accurate return fire still plugs the cave they're firing out of.
They only fake-elect a parliament, and he decided he's not going to get stuck wearing that hat anymore. His sister ran, though.
It would be an insult to suggest that Rocket Boy had to stand for election for his main job. The parliament merely observes his greatness periodically.
Montenegro was Serbia's ally in the wars and were bombed during the actions to free Kosova. Sending 2 people allows them to participate to show a positive current political position, but without traumatizing the people being protected. You don't really want the combatants to do the peacekeeping.
Albania and Bulgaria are both really poor and downtrodden. They can't really send more.
UK will still be contributing to peacekeeping in the same way, because their position in NATO will be unchanged. They send more because they want to; like the US.
Germany sends that many because if they don't that's a lecture they're really tired of hearing and blame on their grandparents neighbors.
Slashdot Mirror
I can remember being 2 years old. Only bits and pieces.
But I remember pretty much everything from about age 4.
Maybe you were just dropped on your head or something?
That explains why I liked math as a kid.
My parents were both naturally good at math but in college one was an art major the other philosophy. They both took extra math and science classes as electives. So they had a confident but relaxed attitude towards math.
And on the last day of 1st grade, they put a bunch of surplus math worksheets from grades 2-4 out on a table, for students who wanted to take home something to look at over the summer. I took one of each home and completed them by myself, so the teachers didn't have a chance to taint me before I could figure out that it is actually all very simple, just following steps in order.
It took years of awful teaching for me to start hating math class, but I was never confused about it; I always knew I liked the math, just not the class!
When did simple arithmetic become mathematics?
In ancient Greek, "mathema" meant knowledge or learning.
"Mathematikos" meant a person who is fond of learning.
From there it became the Latin "mathematica," and then Old French "mathematique."
It became "mathematics" in the late 16th century when it was borrowed by English from the French.
Unfortunately, I didn't find any Minoan references that would hint at where the Greeks got the word. The roots are definitely deeper than stated.
Contextual anxiety related to social settings.
Actual "math anxiety" that isn't just mislabeled social anxiety would be something you feel when doing math. That isn't what is described. What is described is anxiety that is related to being in math class, especially, being called on and having the class focus on them, or the pressure of taking a math test. And it seems to affect students who are good at math the most, which makes perfect sense for social anxiety, but not for math anxiety.
People who are good at math that encounter a situation in their daily life that benefits from a calculation, they don't feel anxiety, they feel empowerment. These are the same people at risk of anxiety in math class. Because the anxiety is caused by their parents and teachers, not by the math. If they think you're better at math, they're more likely to do the shit that causes the anxiety, too.
The math hasn't actually changed.
And the reason the parents can't help is that they don't actually do that sort of math as an adult.
If a parent can't read the book and understand it right away, they shouldn't even be trying to "help." Math is something that has to be exactly correct to be correct, you can't half-remember something from decades ago and start saying, "oh yeah, I know how to do that..."
This 'nerd' is associated with everything considered smart.
That explains why you're an arsesmart farmer.
Orange Skin + Lizard Person = Illegal Alien
You seem to have entirely missed the point what you quoted; the subject of what you quoted is not even physics. In the quote, "west wind" and "leaning" are not contextually connected. Whereas, what you replied to was referring to Newton's 3rd Law, which narrowly covers interactions between things.
And that said, yes, when you lean to the west, you do blow some wind that way.
But regardless, Newton's 3rd Law prevents cause and effect from having meaning when it comes to the action and reaction. Forces act equally due to the interaction. When you sway, and wind blows, the implication that you are swaying, and that is causing the wind to blow that is not true from a physics perspective. Perhaps it is true behaviorally, but physically it makes just as much sense to say that it was the wind pulling you over into a bend.
Interactions are guaranteed to be balanced, causality requires temporal separation and some sort of local imbalance.
Causality would be, the wind blew the tree (or the identical statement: the tree swayed in the wind) and then the tree fell down. Notice the temporal separation? Anything causal has to be over a temporal range, it can't be momentary. Whereas, the interaction between the wind and the tree is always in balance, there is no temporal component to those forces being balanced. Pushing and pulling describe the exact same thing.
This is with just two variables; in electronics it gets worse because you deal with Ohm's Law a lot, which instead of having 2 things in balance, you have 3 variables that you can measure, but that represent a single inseparable phenomena. If you think voltage and current are separate things, good luck getting transient spikes out of your circuits.
You actually need to take a look at the history of events to know, instead of just deciding what you think happened based on the feelies you have when you think about the names of different parties.
Li-ion wasn't proven to be cheap at scale yet when they made that bet.
That's what the story is about; they made decisions 20 years based on future predictions that were wrong, and they still aren't changing plans now even though everybody already knows they were wrong.
Presumably because of internal company politics, since the reasons they cite are so pathetic.
If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears it, the phenomena of sound still happened.
But if a bunch of switches on a computer are placed in a pattern, and it is never run through a DAC connected to a speaker, the phenomena of sound never happened.
If nobody has listened to it, and nobody has played it on an instrument, and nobody even imagined the sound of the notes while writing it, it seems hard to call the whole thing a "song." That's separately from the apparent lack of musically creative artistic elements.
Very little of it even rises to the level of a chime. Just as, a copper bell tossed into the ocean isn't a wind chime. But a pair of bottles tied to strings might be.
Flatulence is probably closer to music than most of the data generated; at least it made a sound.
Oh, digg, I heard of that, isn't that supposed to be the new slashdot?
Tao rock is always guaranteed to be twice as good as Pi pop.
Are you sure youtube has ads?
Japan does have missile defense, and in a war in Korea, Seoul is the prize, they wouldn't want to nuke it. There isn't much else for them to shoot at other than Guam or Hawaii.
The whole "bombard Seoul to shit in 30 minutes" stuff is a load of math-challenged crap. They have n artillery pieces, but in a war they have to aim most of them at the enemy artillery pieces, or in the 30 minutes they don't even have artillery anymore. They have lots of artillery pieces, but the number believed to be aimed to Seoul is more like "dozens."
And if they did aim it all at Seoul, artillery doesn't destroy a city that fast. With artillery it takes continuous bombardment for months to level a city; in 30 minutes you're not even knocking down buildings. People moved away from the exposed side of buildings in the first few minutes, and are taking shelter on the far sides and in basements. You would have thousands of casualties, sure, but not millions.
It isn't like they can send waves of bombers over the city or anything like that.
Carpet bombing wouldn't be needed to stop it, they have computers that observe the artillery fire and calculate the location. Some of it is dug in, but accurate return fire still plugs the cave they're firing out of.
How about rebuild the launch platform he said he scrapped?
Oh, wait...
Pew Pew Pew Pew Pew!
And the Leader of the Free World is an Orange-Skinned Lizard Creature; we haven't even figured out what planet it is from yet.
At least weed is finally legal.
He was not on the ballot. It was in the news.
They only fake-elect a parliament, and he decided he's not going to get stuck wearing that hat anymore. His sister ran, though.
It would be an insult to suggest that Rocket Boy had to stand for election for his main job. The parliament merely observes his greatness periodically.
I can just imagine trying to explain slashdot to a North Korean.
Or nuclear weapons, for that matter.
All their direct communications are monitored, the ships with the delivery would be seized.
They have to hide within the regular data stream somewhere and pretend to be from somewhere else. Like Malaysia.
And they have trouble traveling without being monitored, too, so they can't just do it in person like most criminals.
This is slashdot, don't underestimate the energy people put into farting.
It seems obvious that only Ceiling Cat contains enough entropy in a small enough space to entangle millions of qubits.
So you'd only be able to run it one or two times, most likely, before the cat is consumed, and how do you replace it? It would take years.
While I mostly agree with you, a few points:
Montenegro was Serbia's ally in the wars and were bombed during the actions to free Kosova. Sending 2 people allows them to participate to show a positive current political position, but without traumatizing the people being protected. You don't really want the combatants to do the peacekeeping.
Albania and Bulgaria are both really poor and downtrodden. They can't really send more.
UK will still be contributing to peacekeeping in the same way, because their position in NATO will be unchanged. They send more because they want to; like the US.
Germany sends that many because if they don't that's a lecture they're really tired of hearing and blame on their grandparents neighbors.
The C in W3C suggests that they already are industry, not some sort of regulator of industry.
I know your mom does.
Sorry Sir Tim, this is mostly what information freedom means to humanity.