Leaderboard

Not all shells are calcium carbonate. Radiolaria and Diatoms as counter examples, make their shells/skeletons out of Silica - SiO2.

This is interesting. https://www.ft.com/content/5f393d77-8e5b-4a85-b647-416efbc575ec

You just stated that money has no value. Your vague utopian ideology is no solution at all for people bearing the economic brunt of this crisis.

Maybe more accurate to say that the Dyson company worked with a medical technology company to develop a new ventilator. I read an article about how the UK decided that, instead of getting manufacturers to license designs of existing ventilators and manufacture them (they could have either paid the license fee or mandated that it was waived), decided that they would encourage manufacturers to come up with their own designs. Based on a fairly dubious spec from the government, which has since been rejected as inadequate by medical specialists. Never mind the extra time needed for testing and certification. Crazy, but typical of the "we don't need experts; how hard can it be" attitude of the current bunch of Eton clowns. EDIT: yes, the article that John Cuthber posted!

There are a bunch of ways that you can rearrange the thermodynamic potentials equations, but you need to be careful. W = -P (delta V) assumes constant T and n You can't just pop it into an equation where T and/or n is not constant

It all sounds right. Which text is this from? And how is the performance guarantee defined in that text? If we assume m = 2 in that same proof, why would it not prove that the bound is at least a factor of 3/2 by the same argument, except we replace 4/3 by 3/2. The inequality which reads 2b/m < 4/3 in that proof would then read b < 3/2. And the inequality which reads (2m - b)/m < 4/3 would read (4 - b)/2 < 3/2, that is, b > 1. Since b is an integer, this is a contradiction. It is the same as the mock argument which I gave above in another post. I suspect that your recollection is top notch. However, I fear the source of your information cannot necessarily be trusted. The paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.05554.pdf gives more details on background and more recent bounds. Their new lower bound for the asymptotic competitive ratio is larger than 1.54278.

I found the proof i based my statement upon, it was sorted under data structures (not algorithms) for some reason.

Me too. Maybe there are variations in the definitions of the competitive ratio. It just seems too easy to show a bound of 3/2 in place of 4/3 if you do not require the asymptotic limit. It is the value 4/3 which makes sense asymptotically. Also I expressed it wrong: you can exceed the ratio 4/3 infinitely often, so long as you approach it in the limit. This has no implications for this problem, which deals with assuming an A that has ratio strictly less than 4/3.

The 'economy' was actually the first means to re-distribute wealth. ( whatever 'wealth' meant at the time ) In pre-historic times, you exchanged 'work' for food, provided by the tribe. In medieval times, you exchanged work for a parcel of land that you worked for yourself. Today we exchange 'work' for something that takes the place of food, land, or other forms of wealth; we call it money. In all of these cases, the 'economy' is the means for survival. ( although a case could be made that you don't really need an iPhone 11 pro )

I think you'd better take a good look around, Dim, and not how you imagine things. You might not like what you see.

Is this a threat? I have also other things to do than answering questions. My post is not even half a day on this forum and I have already got threats. In the time of Giordano Bruno you would have probably burned me. I will answer all the questions one by one.