I’ll bet Eminem could find a way
I’ll bet Eminem could find a way
So you are a hypothetical object.
I’m not debating. It is not a matter of opinion. I’m doing you the courtesy of informing you how the entire rest of the world uses the term.
If action A looks for thing X, and it finds thing X, then the test is positive. If action A fails to find thing X, then the test is negative.
If action A claims to find thing X, but later confirmation determines that thing X is not really there, then this situation is called “false positive”.
If action A claims fails to find thing X, but later confirmation determines that thing X is actually there, then this situation is called “false negative”.
That thing X may subjectively be considered an unwanted outcome has **nothing ** to do with the terms used.
Just so you know, if your doctor calls and tells you that your HIV test is positive, you probably shouldn’t run out and celebrate.
Am I the only one who heard this comment in Lil Johns voice?
After all these years I still don’t know how to look at what I’ve coded and tell you a big O math formula for its efficiency.
I don’t even know the words. Like is quadratic worse than polynomial? Or are those two words not legit?
However, I have seen janky performance, used performance tools to examine the problem and then improved things.
I would like to be able to glance at some code and truthfully and accurately and correctly say, “Oh that’s in factorial time,” but it’s just never come up in the blue-collar coding I do, and I can’t afford to spend time on stuff that isn’t necessary.
I so much want you to be a person that didn’t realize Al Jankovic was writing parody songs of other popular songs.
“Imaginary” was merely poor word choice from long ago.
My understanding based on watching too many science communicators videos on YouTube is that such tiny black holes would evaporate quickly before causing harm that humans could appreciate. However, this would provide experimental evidence of Hawkings theory.
It’s also a movie too with Daniel Day-Lewis. He’s kinda hard to forget.
Yes. I have worked in a financial company and a lot of teams in that particular company were structured with 2 or 3 Americans with no skills other than exposure to internal company info, the kind of stuff that should just be written down in a wiki somewhere. And when real work needs to be done they (metaphorically of course) drag an Indian contractor out of a cage who actually knows what’s going on and how to do anything. And they do it with disdain as if being a contributing member of society is a bad thing.
Just being in a meeting with some of these teams made me feel like I was a Harkonnen from Dune.
What if we’re all wrong and the Paulie exclusion principle is just electrons clearing their orbit of debris (sub electrons). Also, for the heaviest elements the outer shell is actually populated by dwarf-electrons. And electron sharing in molecules is just Oort Cloud stuff somehow. And our galaxy is a virus. And our bodies are a battleground. And humans are just batteries. Whait a minute —
What is the average length of something very small (Plank length, electron penis, whatever) and the biggest thing (observable universe distance, actual universe length) ?
That’s why I like the I Ching. Instead of wrapping its abstract advice in hokey mysticism or pop-psychology quackery it comes right out and admits what it’s doing. It say, “Generate a random number between 1 and 64, then read the abstract advice that goes with your number. It may help you see a problem in a new light.”
Look at the PBS Spacetime link someone else provided, but in this case the looking is knowing which slot individual electrons or photons go through. Thus, wave pattern when which slot is not known; random scatter pattern when you know which slot.
Hey, I remember this website from back in the day. They still around or is this old?
Since you know the math, how long before it evaporated? Also, at what distance would an object feel 1G of acceleration?