Prev: Simple hack to get $600 to your home.
Next: Re-use constructor from superclass
From: Pillsy on 15 Jun 2010 09:34
On Jun 15, 9:26 am, Tim Bradshaw <t...(a)tfeb.org> wrote:

> On 2010-06-15 13:30:45 +0100, Tamas K Papp said:

> > But I was already suspicious of this guy being gavino 2.0.

> I think it's important to understand that gavinos are non-denumerable
> (proof of this is left as an exercise - it is a fairly obvious
> diagonalisation argument), so it's not really correct to refer to them
> by numbers like 2.0, or at least not without saying that it is an
> approximation (maybe this was implicit of course, in which case I
> apologise).  I believe that gavinos are normally mapped to [0, 1) in
> fact, though I'm not an expert in the field.

Gavinos are the supersymmetric partners of gavons. You may think that
bolega and gavino are never seen together because they're the same
person, but it's really the Pauli Exclusion Principle at work.

Cheers,
Pillsy
From: Norbert_Paul on 15 Jun 2010 09:45
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>> What is a killfile?
> That this question can even be asked!
Don't make me put you there!

This could be the start of a beautiful flame war.
From: Tamas K Papp on 15 Jun 2010 10:45
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:26:47 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> On 2010-06-15 13:30:45 +0100, Tamas K Papp said:
>
>> But I was already suspicious of this guy being gavino 2.0.
>
> I think it's important to understand that gavinos are non-denumerable
> (proof of this is left as an exercise - it is a fairly obvious
> diagonalisation argument), so it's not really correct to refer to them
> by numbers like 2.0, or at least not without saying that it is an
> approximation (maybe this was implicit of course, in which case I
> apologise). I believe that gavinos are normally mapped to [0, 1) in
> fact, though I'm not an expert in the field.

I think that a finite state continuous-time Markov process is a good
model for gavinos. They arrive with a Poisson rate of about 1-5/year
(remains to be estimated), then alternate between a "dormant" and
"active" state (only in the case of reentrant gavinos only, of course,
otherwise they don't come back from the dormant state). In the
"active" state, they post nonsense occasionally.

If this is a good model, then gavinos are denumerable by construction.
But the 2.0 was referring to the level of sophistication. This one
reached the level of Emacs doctor mode, at least.

Tamas
From: Norbert_Paul on 15 Jun 2010 11:07
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2010-06-15 13:30:45 +0100, Tamas K Papp said:
>
>> But I was already suspicious of this guy being gavino 2.0.
>
> I think it's important to understand that gavinos are non-denumerable
Cool!! Are there finite non-denumerable sets?
From: Tim Bradshaw on 15 Jun 2010 11:17
On 2010-06-15 15:45:45 +0100, Tamas K Papp said:

> If this is a good model, then gavinos are denumerable by construction.

I don't think they are, are they, because the transition probabilities
are real.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Simple hack to get $600 to your home.
Next: Re-use constructor from superclass