LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:02 PM
Original message |
remember the Davis study? |
|
When we figured out that the Travis scenario resulted in a sample set yeilding 23451 subjects to perform at substandard levels per average minimum?
:crazy:
|
AnarchoFreeThinker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
1. the delat coefficient was .32, though. I reject those findings. |
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. but delat coefficients at .32 meet standards when isolation levels are met |
|
Samples taken in conditions that exceed isolation levels were over 79.2342% of the samples taken. Therefore the delat coefficients were held at satisfactory rates.
|
Crazy Guggenheim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:10 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Didn't Galois prove that after proving the symmetry of geometric |
underpants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:12 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I thought that was about how pollen affects fish |
Crazy Guggenheim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. No. The study you are thinking about is utilizing Eigenfunctions |
|
with respect to Monte Carlo Methods.
|
Hugin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
13. Blithering nincompoops! Eigenfunctions! *psshaw!* |
|
Even a nursery school child knows a consequence of the Davis study is:
ln(z) = xi z = e^xi e^xi = cos(x) + sin(x) i
e^i = -1 e^i + 1 = 0 This remarkable equation involves the five most important constants in all of mathematics: 0, 1, i, pi (), and e. The proof is to substitute x = into Euler's Equation above.
|
Crazy Guggenheim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
Hugin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
But, I'm not on a seven second delay.
:P
:D
|
underpants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
Crazy Guggenheim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
19. I knew this was going to bring out the trolls!! |
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. no, that was the Anderson study of 68 |
underpants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
AnarchoFreeThinker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:14 PM
Response to Original message |
5. enough of this. the trolls will be on to us. |
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. trolls be damned, we need results!!! |
anarch
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
We've tried it all: ethyl, methane, sulfinate as an alkalating agent and potent mutagen -- it created a virus so lethal the subject was dead before it even left the table. A repressor protein, that would block the operating cells, wouldn't obstruct replication but it does give rise to an error in replication so that the newly formed DNA strand carries with it a mutation and you've got a virus again....but this, all of this is academic.
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
16. yes, but we have left over stock from the Henderson experiments |
|
They were shipped on the 8th and are stored in dry dock. Please prep them in the Smudgerhenderfelter device and resume tests with conditions 2x the minimum spec.
|
AnarchoFreeThinker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
22. oh sure, just spell it out for the friggin' Freepers why don't ya |
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
23. at least I didnt mention Operation Diaper!! |
AnarchoFreeThinker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
24. might as well just tell them about all the hidden wizzbangles now |
Crazy Guggenheim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
9. Oh ....... You mean the Linear Dymanics people ...... I can't stand them. |
Hugin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:20 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Pish posh! The organic levels were tainted! |
|
Anyone who can spell Euler's Equation knows the results as published were Imaginary! You FOOLS! You didn't listen! http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.euler.equation.html
|
hfojvt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:21 PM
Response to Original message |
12. RU sure that was Davis? |
|
I thought that Davis had something to do with "not getting hooked on Maine" and when you say "Travis" RU talking about Randy Travis or Travis Tritt?
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. no, sir Ralph Alphonso Travis III |
|
Of the famous Travis family of Fucking, Austria. :crazy:
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-16-05 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
21. can nobody else provide me with the Kanutant factor of Elsith? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 03:14 AM
Response to Original message |