Topics

16

Entertainment District / Bill Maher on John Stewart -- New Movie

« on: October 02, 2008, 03:51:20 pm »

When people ask me who Bill Maher is, I often explain that he's sort-of like Jon Stewart.  It's not a great description, since Maher is more intellectual and more often writes long monologues geared towards humorous social commentary.  But they really are the two main, "political comedian guys" -- they are like two literary magazines that are both great at what they do, and though they have a different approach, they are both the bigtime literary magazines.  For this reason, I've often thought it unlikely that they would be brought together.  They probably have good will towards one another, but having them together would be somewhat like having Tom Brokaw on Anderson Cooper -- maybe awkward for both of them, since they have their own followings, and do similar things.  But I've long thought it would be extremely interesting to see a discussion between them -- I thought that Stewart would make a great guest on the Maher show, or vice versa.  What do they really think about each other? They must watch and judge one another frequently.

Well, it happened! Maher came onto Stewart's "Daily Show" to talk about politics, and his new movie "Religulous" (opening Oct. 3).

Here it is:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh6--zN0oCI 
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DffUWssrK2s

17

Trash Can / Re: Abortion ethics dilema

« on: July 09, 2008, 05:53:39 pm »

I'm still waiting for someone to comment on the posts Ender and I made in response to Myndfyre.  It seems whenever a good point is made, it is ignored or not acknowledged by the other side, and then the discussion is derailed with irrelevant nonsense by people like Crazed, and then the other side picks up on the irrelevant nonsense and resumes posting.

I have a job and I can't always post a thoughtful, thorough reply.  This is one of those instances.  When I can post one, you'll see it.

Cut the passive aggressive garbage.  I have a job too.  And you're pretty much completely cornered in this argument.  I don't think you have the strength of character to admit it though.  I don't think you have the strength of character to do anything but to continue to find rationalisations to support an initial position you have.

18

Trash Can / Re: Let's hear it!

« on: July 08, 2008, 05:07:13 pm »

Edit: Not worth it

19

Gaming / Civ 4

« on: June 15, 2008, 09:59:08 pm »

Who has played this?  How does it compare to Civ 2 or the other Civ games (including Alpha Centauri)?  It was highly recommended to me, as someone who really liked Civ 2.

20

Gaming / Civ 4

« on: June 01, 2008, 01:24:06 am »

Who here has played Civ 4?  It was highly recommended to me by a friend.

21

General Discussion / IG Nobel Prizes

« on: October 05, 2007, 07:57:41 pm »

These are prizes given out (as somewhat of a joke) at Harvard, to those who have published papers/received funding for their so-called "serious research".   The recipients of these awards are decided by those who have won Nobel prizes.   Here is a glimpse of some of the important research taking place at high-profile facilities across the world.

Glashow, Laughlin, Mello, and other Nobel prize winners have handed out the 2007 Ig Nobel prizes:

   * "Chemistry" - Mayu Yamamoto of the International Medical Centre of Japan, for developing a way to extract vanillin, or vanilla fragrance and flavouring, from cow dung.
     "She seems to claim if companies start using this method it might help with global warming because some of all the cow dung that causes problems in the atmosphere will start getting used," Abrahams said in an interview.
   * "Linguistics" - Juan Manuel Toro, Josep B. Trobalon and Nuria Sebastian-Galles, of Universitat de Barcelona - for a study showing rats sometimes fail to distinguish between a person speaking Japanese backwards and a person speaking Dutch backwards.
   * "Peace Prize" -- The Air Force Wright Laboratory, Dayton, Ohio for instigating research and development on a chemical weapon, the so-called "gay bomb", that "will make enemy soldiers become sexually irresistible to each other".
   * "Biology" - Dr Johanna EMH van Bronswijk of Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, for their census of all the mites, insects, spiders, pseudoscorpions, crustaceans, bacteria, algae, ferns and fungi that share our beds at night.
   * "Economics" - Kuo Cheng Hsieh, of Taichung, Taiwan, for patenting a device in 2001 that catches bank robbers by dropping a net over them, known as the "net trapping system for capturing a robber immediately".
     The inventor, however, could not be found by Ig Nobel representatives in Taiwan "We had people in Taiwan looking for him. He's vanished. Somebody suggested to us the possibility that maybe the poor man was trapped inside his own machine," Abrahams said.

22

General Discussion / Buying a new computer (suggestions?)

« on: July 28, 2007, 04:24:07 pm »

I am buying a desktop for my family.  Since I am lazy, and desktops are generally quite cheap anyways now, I will likely order a Dell.  I haven't known much about personal computers for about 7-8 years, so I would like some suggestions.  It isn't going to be a gaming computer, just a computer that will run quickly/smoothly and stay good for general purpose applications for a long time.

How much RAM should I get?
Which processor should I get?
Which graphics card?
Any sound system recommendations? (I want this to be really nice)

Money isn't a big issue, although I would probably like it stay under $1500.

23

Trash Can / Re: Wrong woman in jail for 9 days

« on: July 24, 2007, 11:56:17 am »

They don't know what to say. 

That's because it's hard to respond to something so stupid.

24

Trash Can / Re: i look 15 and I bought beer!

« on: July 13, 2007, 02:56:38 am »

Chances are this story is as true as his "experience" being arrested... (1, 2, 3, 4)

Chances are you desperately need a boyfriend.

25

Trash Can / Re: Interesting Pew survey of Muslims

« on: May 22, 2007, 06:37:15 pm »

Delete

26

General Discussion / Call for opinions on human life!

« on: May 16, 2007, 11:37:08 pm »

This thread is solely to see what your opinions are.  I am not going to argue with any of it here, and my only responses will be to clarify a point.  And I have no intention of starting another thread for argument or criticising you here.

The Question:
For those of you who think the same rules shouldn't apply to humans as to other animals, why not?  For example, why is it fine to kill another animal, but not a human? Why could you sleep at night doing one and not the other? What makes humans different?  If you have a religious reason, please post it, and I am also very interested in non-religious reasons as well.  Please try to explain what you mean clearly, and don't be overly brief.

For example, you might say that "humans have feelings and animals do not", and then explain why you think that.

Thanks, I appreciate it!

27

Math and Other Problems / Question 1 in Calculus Proof Questions

« on: May 01, 2007, 12:31:10 am »

Since the introductory topic is quite cluttered, it is best to use this topic for attempted solutions to this problem.

Prove that whenever is continuous and , then



(Rule's hints:  Note that this is actually a stronger statement than the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus -- the function f(x) need not be differentiable.  To clarify notation, the function has any positive real number in its domain, and it maps this number to some other real number.  The closed interval a to b is a subset of the open interval from 0 to 1.  Basically a and b are numbers between 0 and 1, and b >= a. So f(x) is not very different from any function you've likely seen so far, except its domain is restricted to the positive reals and doesn't include 0.  Please do not get sidetracked by the notation, as the essence of the proof should be in noting that f is continuous on a bounded interval.  But there are many possible approaches so please keep an open mind and just look at the equation. Also it is not essential that you use the FTC to prove this question, and this result does not trivially follow from the FTC.)


Edit: If you are unfamiliar with some of the notation you may be under the impression that this stuff about f having a domain on an open interval, and so on, is really important to the proof, but it actually isn't.  If you just look at the main equation to be proven, you should be able to start playing with it and get a good idea of how the proof would work. The continuity will probably be important though, at least in some small intuitive way.  Also note that the limit is outside the integral.  In general, limits and integrals cannot be interchanged, although in many introductory courses to calculus this is just done without justification. (If you are interested the function inside the integral must converge uniformly for this operation to be justified, but you do not need to know that for this question).

28

Math and Other Problems / Question 3 in Calculus Proof Questions

« on: May 01, 2007, 12:27:53 am »

See here for an introduction. It is a guide as to the prerequisite knowledge that you need, but if you feel comfortable with single variable calculus you should be fine.

This question is easier than the question in the above link.

Let f be a continuous function on the reals.  Suppose that f'(x) exists whenever x doesn't equal 0, and


Does it follow that f'(0) exists?

29

Math and Other Problems / Question 2 in Calculus Proof Questions

« on: May 01, 2007, 12:18:25 am »

See here for an introduction. It is a guide as to the prerequisite knowledge that you need, but if you feel comfortable with single variable calculus you should be fine.

The problem here is harder than the problem in the above link.

Suppose satisfies for all . 

Show that



Rule's Hint: Again the notation may be confusing, so I will explain.  f is continuous in the closed interval from 0,1, and the absolute value of its derivative is less than A in this interval.  We want to show the inequality for all natural numbers n (n = 0, 1, 2, ...).  It is unlikely you will find a solution to this problem on the internet.

30

Math and Other Problems / Short and Interesting Single Variable Calculus Problems

« on: April 30, 2007, 10:53:03 pm »

To do these problems you should only need a basic understanding of single variable calculus; this entails a strong grasp of essential concepts like continuity, differentiation and integration, and a familiarity with some of the central theorems, like the Mean Value Theorem, L'Hopital's Rule, and the intermediate value theorem, most of which are common sense.  In other words, the prerequisite knowledge is very low, and there won't be any really obscure "tricks" that are more transparent to people with an extensive background in mathematics.  If you have taken AP Calculus you should be able to do these.

For fun I am thinking of writing a calculus competition for high school and first year university students, and we could do a trial run on the x86 forums! (e.g. a mini competition with similar problems to ones that I am thinking of using).   I also want to compare the quality of education the people here have in single variable calculus; the first question here was actually given to me on a calculus exam a long time ago.  I had 20 minutes to complete it, and the scaling was minimal.  So if you attempt the question here and get say, 7/10, then that would be a rough estimate for your grade in this kind of course (70%).

Here are the questions! There exist complete and short solutions to each of them (less than half a page typed), so if you are finding that your solution is extremely long or complicated, there is likely a more efficient approach.  Also it is important that you read the questions carefully.  Finally, I think these questions are quite fun to do because all that is needed is some abstract thought, not obscure knowledge or tricks, and their solutions all say something quite meaningful/profound in analysis.  I guarantee you will feel good if you solve one.

Let me know if you would be interested in setting up a small competition, or being used as test subjects for my test prototype!

(I will provide some hints throughout the questions)
Question 1
Prove that whenever is continuous and , then



(Rule's hints:  Note that this is actually a stronger statement than the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus -- the function f(x) need not be differentiable.  To clarify notation, the function has any positive real number in its domain, and it maps this number to some other real number.  The closed interval a to b is a subset of the open interval from 0 to 1.  Basically a and b are numbers between 0 and 1, and b >= a. Please do not get sidetracked by the notation, as the essence of the proof should be in noting that f is continuous on a bounded interval.  But there are many possible approaches so please keep an open mind and just look at the equation. Also it is not essential that you use the FTC to prove this question, and this result does not trivially follow from the FTC).

I will post a new question every week if there is interest.  Also it is highly unlikely that you will be able to find a solution to these on the internet.