bloodhound

ok. ill just stick it in maple when i get home. at uni now, and have to leg it to the next lecture.

it depends on how resource hungry you are. there is no point in putting an extra stick if you already have more than enough. and for general usage 512 is definitely more that enough.

well thats what did... i rebooted without WB..usage is around 103MB. booted with WB and its 30MB... i am sure it doesnt matter as i have 512 MB ram. it should affect performance that much.

nope sorry. dodnt know.... to all of you using WB: how much does it affect your resources. cos whenever i use it, my virtual memory usage increases by about 30MB

hey does anyone remember that movie??i can't remember whats its called basically this guy going to jail and dies to prove that you can convict an innocent...

i see quite a lot of pple here window blinds.

calculate this definite integral [math]\chi \colon \mathbb{R} \to \{0,1\}[/math] defined by [math]\chi(x)=0[/math] if x is rational and, [math]\chi(x)=1[/math] if x is irrational. Then calculate this [math]\int_{0}^{1}\chi(x)dx[/math]

w00t we just finished doing that as well. its quite cool result just doing step functions and reimann integrals now.

read all about it: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2213

I quoted your statement as i disagree with it in two ways. First of all I disagree with the general American attitude that Bigger is Better. Theres also the issue of handling. Second of all, Fuel-Efficient car doesnt mean less performance. European cars will generally outperform a similar sized American model, and also have a higher mileage.

there is already a massive thread on this , i was reading it a bit while ago. ill try to find it

got 13, on my first.

HAH, thats just pure BOLOXX

well that IS the meaning of inertia... and by object, Newton's obviously means mass. what else can he mean?

hybrid/electric car doesnt matter much now. if only americans started producing more fuel efficient cars at the moment.

i swear to god, it should be first. i dont see what the second law has to do with inertia this is the meaning of inertia from the oxford online dictionary (physics) a property (= characteristic) of matter (= a substance) by which it stays still or, if moving, continues moving in a straight line unless it is acted on by a force outside itself.

where did u get the limit of 200MPa from?

i thought it was useless as well to be honest. it uses windowx xps icons, do when u zoom in out, u get pixellation, and edge distortions. ir would be better if they had their own set of icons.

note: for the third one , f x is undefined at a certian value of x. giving you another asymptop which in this case is vertical

Let [math]f\colon \mathbb{R}^{2}\to\mathbb{R}[/math] given by [math]f(x,y)=\frac{xy^3}{x^2+y^6}[/math] if [math](x,y)\ne (0,0)[/math] and 0 if (x,y)=(0,0) Question asks me to use the definition or partial derivatives to show that f_x and f_y both exist at (0,0). and at any other point (x,y) i can do the first part, but for the second part i cannot simplify the expression for the limit.

the first ones an "upward" parabola symmetrical around some point c. which also happens to be the global minimum. by increasing do u mean , non decreasing or strictly increasing? my lecturer uses increasing means non decreasing so just want to a clarification if u take the definition to be non decreasing, then basically. f(x) is increasing on (a,b) if f'(x)>=0 for all x in (a,b) (i am not sure about the definition of concave so u might wanna confirm) f is concave up for some interval if f'' is greater than 0 in that interval f is concave down if f'' less that 0 in that interval first one and second one dont have asymptotes. to find the coordinate intercepts just see what value f takes when x = 0. and what value x takes when f(x) is 0 to find the asymptote to the third one, just see what happens if u increase x bit by bit. lets just increase by 1. f(1)=1/2 f(2)=2/3 f(3)=3/4 what do u think will happen to f as x increases indefinitely?

well , shredding does make good entertainment. the lead guitarist of my band when i was in school was an amazing shredder, but then he grew out of it. There are some truly "virtuouso" music out there for classical guitar, i can play a few of them. Its useful when you want to show off.

god , how many threads are there on who plays what instrument. well i play guitar. mainly classical nylons strings. but i am comfortable playing steel string acoutics or 12 strings. i am fine with electic guitars as well. been playing for about 8 years. Anyone who plays guitar will know how to play elementary bass. Well i am quite good at bass as well. I have played Double Bass on occassions, got massive blisters on my hand. I can plays drums, and i had a go at piano + trumpet + violin. (trumpet + violin , just a go, didnt say i was any good)

i think its essential to develop good technique, as endurance without technique is an oxymoron. Good techinique will muscles more relaxed and can help improve speed and accuracy. But i guess everyone has their own way. Remember that speed doesnt make a solo good. Variation of Dynamics, tempo, timbre add a great deal to a solo. of course some techinal brilliance doesnt go to waste.

ooo ... teh hawtness. nice pic. Welcome , i am the forum bloodhound, and i like to suck....... a lot.