jordan

Hey, does anyone have any idea how this works? The one big thing to overcome is taking it to an imaginary power. Can anyone explain how that works? And how does an irrational number taken to a power ever make itself rational again? That seems rather counterintuitive.

I don't know how to make this all into one probability, but my simple guess would be: There is a 1/100 chance that the first guy takes seat #100. There is also a 1/100 chance that the first guy would take seat #2. If guy one takes seat #2, then there is a 1/99 chance that guy two takes seat #100. Now, when guy three gets on, I first thought there would be a 2/99 chance that his seat would be taken, but I think that's wrong. If guy one doesn't pick seat #2, then the odds would be 1/99 that seat #3 is taken, not 2/99. Ok. Enough from me. I don't know how to add all of that up, but I think it's the right start to the problem.

I was asked this weekend for psychology class to develop a study to test the effectiveness of a drug on children with hyperactivity. This study (and the drug) aren't real, but we must remain within the guidelines of the scienetific method and ethics. Now, my plan is to have the children focus in a closed room on a monotonous task and see how long they keep working until one of a set group of actions indicative of distraction are noticed. Then, after taking the drug, the process will be repeated and I will have to look for a change in the length of time they remained focused. So, the question: I need a control group. I can't seem to come up with what I would need a control group for in this study. I have considered using a placebo, but I would doubt a mental disorder can be cured by playing a mental trick on someone. If these children have no control over how long they can focus, does it make sense that telling them they will be cured with a drug wont give them any more control? If so, what can be used as a control?

Is it at all possible that you can change it yourself? The only reason I ask is because when you made the bubble characters, I thought you said you went in and edited the script.

That's stupid. It doesn't make the least bit of sense. Oh well, thanks for the reply. I'll just check that forum the old way.

I can tell you that the debate forum did appear once, blike. I remember because Sayo went in and made a ton of new threads and they took up half a page of my "new posts" search. But the subjects for those are very big and bold, I don't think I would have missed it twice: once when it was made and once when budellewragh posted in it. Also, there have been several replys to challenges I don't ever remember seeing.

Ok, Sayo. If I ever get onto the site but am a guest and don't want to log in, I use the "today's posts" link at the top of the page. Can that be made to pull up only today's posts instead of today's posts and some of yesterdays? When I'm logged in, can the "new posts" link display thread from the debate forum because I think I have accidentaly missed budellewragh's opening post and ecceded my time for replying. (By the way, as soon as I get any time I'm going to try and respond to that).

Unfortunatly, we haven't gotten to derivatives yet either.

Thanks for the help DerSpooky. For the first one, I know you're getting a little too complex because we haven't learned about L'Hopitals Rule. On second thought, your method is probably simpler, but there has to be another way that doesn't use that rule. Since you mentioned it, though, what is this rule? Also on the first one, I have managed to narrow it down to [math]\frac{cos(\Delta{x})+\sqrt{3}-1}{2(\Delta{x})}[/math] The second one sounds like it might work. I'll try it out it see what happens. Thanks again.

I've got a test tomorrow. As I was working on some of the review problems, I came across two I couldn't answer: [math]\lim_{x \to 0} \frac{sin[(\pi/6)+\Delta{x}]-(1/2)}{\Delta{x}}[/math] [math]\lim_{x \to +0} \frac{csc(2x)}{x}[/math] Please help with an analytical proof. Oh, and how do I type the symbol for "all real numbers".

Normal is rather tough to define. I've know about it since probably 9th grade, but there are others in 12th with me who still don't know. The f(x) is probably what you normaly call y. As in y=2x is the same as f(x)=2x. f(x) basicaly says that for a given value of x, what is the result of the function.

That is pretty funny.

I was told when I first started driving to be very carefull every time the emergency vehicle lights were flashing next to the red light because there are often times, for police, when they don't want the criminal to know they are coming. Any time there is something like a bank robbery, they would want to approach without lights and sirens so as to avoid causing the robbers to panic and/or flee.

Any one have any idea why I'm a guest as soon as I open SFN (all the icons are those of a guest) but as soon as I click on anything, I am logged in.

Seconded Cap'n.

Then by setting hbar equal to one, you wont effect your calculations except for the units, right? And when it equals one, what are the units?

Nope. Just what I said above. Alright. If you don't mind then: hbar is a constant it seems. What exactly is the number, and why was that number chosen? Was it modeled after a physical observation or was it provided through mathematical equations? How does it relate to this: How can they all equal 1?

What might be some useful classes to take when I go to college next year to learn about this stuff Martin? How do you know so much about it? As of now, I can follow the math, but the words are still meaningless as far as a real-life application. I'm interested in learning more about it though.

You are doing the same thing on a certain level. You have begun to convince yourself that Bush is only in this for himself and that he is evil and selfish. That's not true. Though some of his actions may have selfish motivations, he does most of what he does sincerely and after considering the consequences. I'm not saying he's the best at weighing all the options and then picking the best one, but a statement like this: "Conclusion: Bush is a murdurous, racist, dictator." just goes to show how much you have begun to decieve yourself. Phi is very outspoken against Bush, and though I don't want to speak for him, I don't think even he would support any of the three conclusions you have drawn. If you wish to attack someone for being brainwashed by senseless media, I think you should make sure you don't overuse the exagerations. Calling Bush murdurous is questionable. Calling Bush racist is wrong. Calling Bush a dictator is just being rediculous.

Doesn't the world have enough different units as it is?

Yes. That's important to my question. I'll agree to that. This is where I'm afraid we are confused: If we assume the first quote in this post plus this quote from a while back: to be true, then I am interested in how you account for him still having 50-some% of the nation on his side. I'm not sure how he can be a stupid liar who is destroying the country when he has more than half the country convinced he's not a stupid liar. I know you're looking for economic/foreign policy answers, but that wasn't what I was getting at. It seems one of his greatest accomplishments is getting reelected after "destroying" our's and Iraq's countries the first time around. That takes some inteligence to accomplish.

Really. I was at school yesterday and didn't manage to catch any of it. Well, Michelson's on the bench today anyway. I just felt the Americans needed a little representation in this European-dominated thread.

What he also seems to have is charisma...somehow. Despite the fact that yours seems to be the prevailing attitude of most everyone (even some who will vote for him), he has found a way to get (what is on pace to be) two terms in office. How do you account for the fact that he is such a big idiot but has managed to manipulate the country to vote for him? Surely that takes inteligence.

Hahaha...the Americans have taken the lead in 3 of the 4 pairings and the other one is all square. Looks like a comeback.

The quote was "Read my lips, no new taxes" first off. Second, do you really value him sticking to his campaign promises more than doing what he thinks is best as dictated by the changing times? Third, is this the only account of a president "lying" you can remember?