Can someone explain why the anticausal form of a geometric series with |R|>1 is the same as the causal geometric series with |R|<1? This is completely unintuitive.
I'm talking about this shit:
Who is killing all those NASA scientists and why?
Hello everybody!, I search a book, if anyone have it, can you share it with me?, the book's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J. Griffiths, I mean, I want E-reader version.
Say Lord Phenotype was 20 years younger. Also say M-Theory was verifiable and tested and proven to the the Unified Theory of Everything and he wins the Nobel Prize in Physics. Would that guarantee he could get any job at any company in the world? Assume he retires from Maths and Physics after winning the most prestigious awards in both as well as solving the most important Physics problem ever. Even though his research doesn't tie into anything, could he just demand a job at some Wall St bank, Google job, Nasa, Military, etc? Would they try to hire him just because of his sheer geniusness?
every ashkenazi woman on the planet already wants to "tap that"
Can anyone help me to find a common mendelian trait in humans?
In my genetics class we are going to make genealogy for a mendelian trait and it has been a little bit hard to define one.
What did Ayn Rand mean by this?????????
>tfw they realize the earth and moon's orbits around the sun aren't stable and that everything is out of control
>sun begins to turn into red giant
>gravity fluctuations destabilize moon's orbit
>moon crashes into earth and survivors sent into space to repopulate the earth afterwards watch as the impact sends it hurtling into the sun
>there is chaos on board, however they eventually accept death is inevitable and set a collision course with mars so bacterial samples are spread across its surface
>billions of years later life on mars warmed by the red giant sun achieves sapience and wonders how life could have arisen when ancient mars had poor conditions for abiogenesis
>one being hypothesizes that it must have come from a planet that existed before the sun changed
>theory is rejected because the bacteria couldn't have survived the journey from a rock ejected by an asteroid impact
>all that is left of our civilization is a rejected hypothesis in their records
Remember, discard the number nine, to know if the results of their sums and multiplications are correct.
So what about an "infinite set"? Well, to begin with you should say precisely what the term means.
Okay if you don't, at least someone should. Putting an adjective in front of a noun does not in itself make a mathematical concept.
Cantor declared that an "infinite set" is a set which is not finite. Surely that is unsatisfactory, as Cantor no doubt suspected himself. It's like declaring that an "all-seeing Leprechaun" is a Leprechaun which can see everything. Or an unstoppable mouse is a mouse which cannot be stopped. These grammatical constructions do not create concepts, except perhaps in literary or poetic sense. It is not clear that there are any sets that are not finite, just as it's not clear that there are any Leprechauns which can see everything, or that there are mice which cannot be stopped.
Certainly in science there is no reason to suppose that "infinite sets" exist. Are there and infinite number of quarks or electrons in the universe? If physicists had to hazard a guess, I am confident that the majority would say: No. But even if there were an infinite number of electrons it's unreasonable to suppose that you can get an infinite number of them all together as a single data object
>United States of America (USA)
>contestants are all Asian