Live trash can
Warlord
I hate logic. But logic is important in science.
Do you think there is something to be gained from studying logic?
Do you think there is something to be gained from studying logic?
The Very-Many-Questions-Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread Thread 36
- Thread starter Cutlass
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 3d stuff game of thrones
- Status
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
what soda?Hopefully the soda is diet coke, not regular
BenitoChavez
Elderly Tortoise
So I was watching the college (American) football championship game yesterday where it was Alabama vs Clemson. The announcers seemed to think that the strategy of each of the teams was to have their offense run as many plays as possible in order to make the defense of the other team tired. How exactly does this work? Assuming each team has proper conditioning why would the defense get tired faster than the offense? I think that each team does roughly the same amount of running, jumping, pushing, etc over each play and thus expends on average the same amount of energy.
Iirc stuff like the incompleteness theorem are logic + some basic number theory (uses properties of primes)
logic can look very boring if the thinker just uses the symbols (eg wittgenstein, whose work has other issues too). But if they present the thought in non symbol manner imo it is nice.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
Defense is more tiring for multiple reasons. Biggest one is you don't know where the ball is going so you move more, switch directions, have to stay mentally alert always. It's a lot easier to just run from point A to point B than to chase someone else when you don't know where they are running to.
Also the offensive linemen don't move as much as defensive ones. They're trying to make a wall basically to not move while defensive linemen are trying to run through them.
Then there's taking plays off. If it's a quick hand off the receivers don't really have to go all out, just start the route, while defensive players can't take plays off. Or vice versa, on a deep pass, the running backs on a short route can stop blocking or whatever as the ball sails over their heads.
Also the offense controls the flow of the game. There's a time limit to when they have to snap the ball but they can snap it earlier so the defense has to get set, while the offense can sub in players if anyone gets tired and keep people fresh. I think defensive backs and linebackers generally play more snaps than receivers. Defensive linemen usually rotate. Offensive linemen and quarterbacks typically play all the offensive snaps.
Last edited:
In addition to what Civvver said, the offensive team knows what it intends to try to do next, so can substitute players more often. Giving some of their players a rest break. The defensive team has to see what the offensive team is doing before they can make substitutions, and often just don't have time to do so.
Chukchi Husky
Lone Wolf
Why do people make fan works?
yung.carl.jung
Hey Bird! I'm Morose & Lugubrious
I think logic today is equated, in colloquial talk, with common sense. however logic, in its actual meaning, is the complete opposite of common sense. logic is always removed from its worldly context, it is purely a system of axioms. formal logic is perhaps useful, though I don't think it's very important ""in science"", aside from compsci, philosophy, maths, physics and maybe some other fringe fields like metaphysics, no one relies on logic anymore. we rely on epirical data, prediction, models, the peer review process, the scientific method, but not logic.
well, only if you want to go that far. you *could* call literally any axiomatic system logic, but I don't think that really gets us anywhere. logic is formal logic, and formal logic as a way of abstract thought that is freed entirely from worldly thought, it is a priori thought. computers compute, they do not think, however the difference between these two processes is also.. shady. humans compute, too, from time to time.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,082
When I used to do it, it was because the work in question had made me feel something and I wanted to do something with those feelings. I don't do it anymore though.
Question: Are autoimmune disorders commonly comorbid with each other? I would think that if you had one, it would increase the risk of having other ones as well, but when I searched it I couldn't really understand the journal articles (1, 2) that came up.
The short answer is "yes, some disorders are co-morbid and others are not" based on your links.
You're asking this in a game-modding forum?
Sure thing, try this logic puzzle.
https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/...blue-eyes-problem-why-is-the-oracle-necessary
Blue Eyes Logic Puzzle
A group of people with assorted eye colors live on an island. They are all perfect logicians -- if a conclusion can be logically deduced, they will do it instantly. No one knows the color of their eyes. Every night at midnight, a ferry stops at the island. Any islanders who have figured out the color of their own eyes then leave the island, and the rest stay. Everyone can see everyone else at all times and keeps a count of the number of people they see with each eye color (excluding themselves), but they cannot otherwise communicate. Everyone on the island knows all the rules in this paragraph.
On this island there are 100 blue-eyed people, 100 brown-eyed people, and the Guru (she happens to have green eyes). So any given blue-eyed person can see 100 people with brown eyes and 99 people with blue eyes (and one with green), but that does not tell him his own eye color; as far as he knows the totals could be 101 brown and 99 blue. Or 100 brown, 99 blue, and he could have red eyes.
The Guru is allowed to speak once (let's say at noon), on one day in all their endless years on the island. Standing before the islanders, she says the following:
"I can see someone who has blue eyes."
Who leaves the island, and on what night?
There are no mirrors or reflecting surfaces, nothing dumb. It is not a trick question, and the answer is logical. It doesn't depend on tricky wording or anyone lying or guessing, and it doesn't involve people doing something silly like creating a sign language or doing genetics. The Guru is not making eye contact with anyone in particular; she's simply saying "I count at least one blue-eyed person on this island who isn't me."
And lastly, the answer is not "no one leaves."
A group of people with assorted eye colors live on an island. They are all perfect logicians -- if a conclusion can be logically deduced, they will do it instantly. No one knows the color of their eyes. Every night at midnight, a ferry stops at the island. Any islanders who have figured out the color of their own eyes then leave the island, and the rest stay. Everyone can see everyone else at all times and keeps a count of the number of people they see with each eye color (excluding themselves), but they cannot otherwise communicate. Everyone on the island knows all the rules in this paragraph.
On this island there are 100 blue-eyed people, 100 brown-eyed people, and the Guru (she happens to have green eyes). So any given blue-eyed person can see 100 people with brown eyes and 99 people with blue eyes (and one with green), but that does not tell him his own eye color; as far as he knows the totals could be 101 brown and 99 blue. Or 100 brown, 99 blue, and he could have red eyes.
The Guru is allowed to speak once (let's say at noon), on one day in all their endless years on the island. Standing before the islanders, she says the following:
"I can see someone who has blue eyes."
Who leaves the island, and on what night?
There are no mirrors or reflecting surfaces, nothing dumb. It is not a trick question, and the answer is logical. It doesn't depend on tricky wording or anyone lying or guessing, and it doesn't involve people doing something silly like creating a sign language or doing genetics. The Guru is not making eye contact with anyone in particular; she's simply saying "I count at least one blue-eyed person on this island who isn't me."
And lastly, the answer is not "no one leaves."
Answer
Spoiler :
BenitoChavez
Elderly Tortoise
I'm not aware of any developers but there is at least one Firaxis employee, FXS_Sarah, who occasionally posts in the Civ VI forum. She has done the voice-overs for the first look videos and hosted some of the live streams for the new expansion.
As Lemon says.
It depends on what type you consider, because auto-immune diseases vary in their cause. Their are some which are rather related (e.g. the different arthritises), and some which are more unrelated. You'd guess that some are therefore more likely to appear together.
In the 2nd link you provide, in table 2, you can see the % of co-occurence. You can see that some hardly co-occure with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, whereas lupus occures in nearly 4% of the patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
That's a focus on only these 2 diseases though, maybe others co-occure more often, no clue.
Yes.
During the Civ5 release (and I'm sure before too) you had some presence of John Schaefer, Dennis Shirk, various 2K representatives, and I think Sid Meier also has an account somewhere, but unused for a very long time.
Last edited:
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Sid Meier has an account. As I recall, he created it in advance of the release of Civ4: Colonization and made a number of posts talking about Civ4 and answering questions about the upcoming release. I don't know if he's ever used the account since, though.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
