The perpetual calendar
in [Math]
|
Prev: THE MIND OF MATHEMATICIANS PART 7 " SPATIAL MATHEMATICS , VALUE OF 1 and 3
Next: Exactly why the theories of relativity are complete nonsense- the basic mistake exposed!
From: R H Draney on 26 Feb 2010 11:13 Peter T. Daniels filted: > >On Feb 25, 1:29=A0pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)ducksburg.com> wrote: >> >> "archaeoastronomy" > >No, that's speculation about the alignments of Stonehenge or the Nasca >figures or whatever. > >Which is different from the sort of _recorded_ observations made from >at least the early first millennium BCE in Mesopotamia (and from some >point in China) down to the time of Tycho Brahe, on the basis of >nothing but whose naked-eye observations, Kepler worked out the theory >of elliptical planetary orbits. Impressive, true, but I once got my hands on a book on celestial mechanics that derived the fact of elliptical orbits (and the "equal areas in equal times" principle) starting with nothing but the fact that gravity is in inverse-square proportion to distance....r -- "Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly." - Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
From: Evan Kirshenbaum on 26 Feb 2010 11:20 "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <mail(a)peterduncanson.net> writes: > On 25 Feb 2010 09:04:51 -0800, R H Draney <dadoctah(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > >>BrE filted: >>> >>>On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:04:21 GMT, the Omrud >>><usenet.omrud(a)gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>What happens when the Messiah does arrive? Is there some sort of >>>>central switch which can be pushed to update all the rabbis? >>> >>>They will all be gathered together in the Promised Land. Jesus of >>>Nazareth will arrive and will address them: "Right then, let just try >>>again. Pay careful attention...". >> >>Oh great...the Prince of Peace brought PowerPoint slides....r > > ...following a hallowed tradition. > > Moses is well known for his presentation of ten bullet points on two > slides reportedly engraved by The Lord. > > The creation of the Earth and its inhabitants involved a seven stage > process. The scriptures do not reveal whether the Creator made a > checklist in advance, and if so on what it was written. Well, all of the "And God saw that it was good"s certainly sound like a verbose way of saying "Check." -- Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Theories are not matters of fact, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |they are derived from observing Palo Alto, CA 94304 |fact. If you don't have data, you |don't get good theories. You get kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com |theology instead. (650)857-7572 | --John Lawler http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
From: R H Draney on 26 Feb 2010 11:26 James Silverton filted: > >I am trying to remember when Fortran introduced arrays with arbitrary >indexing, that is, starting at numbers other than 1. I have not >programmed in Fortran in years and I do remember the change but not when >it happened. Somewhere buried in storage I have a book on Fortran that compares seventy or eighty implementations of the language (each time a feature is introduced, there's a table showing whether it exists in that flavor, and exactly what the restrictions are)...the table on subscripting gives such varieties as: positive integer constant scalar integer variable (n) integer variable plus or minus integer constant (n+i, n-i) integer multiple of variable plus or minus constant (i*n+j, i*n-j) arbitrary integer expressions arbitrary expressions of any type so long as they're convertible to integer Most Fortrans allowed only the first four of these; the last two were considered wild-eyed and radical...you couldn't run backwards through an array with a loop incrementing KOUNT from 1 to 10, subscripting the array with 11-KOUNT; things had to be in exactly one of the approved forms...and you certainly couldn't combine multiple variables in one, or use an element of one array as an index in another like VALUES(ISIZE(ITABLE(K))).... *Defining* arrays was even more strict...either a constant or, if the array was a subroutine parameter, a constant that was *also* a parameter.... A similar table gave the same levels of complexity for the upper and lower bounds of a DO statement, and for the increment....r -- "Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly." - Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
From: Yusuf B Gursey on 26 Feb 2010 11:27 On Feb 26, 11:13 am, R H Draney <dadoc...(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > Peter T. Daniels filted: > > > > >On Feb 25, 1:29=A0pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)ducksburg.com> wrote: > > >> "archaeoastronomy" > > >No, that's speculation about the alignments of Stonehenge or the Nasca > >figures or whatever. > > >Which is different from the sort of _recorded_ observations made from > >at least the early first millennium BCE in Mesopotamia (and from some > >point in China) down to the time of Tycho Brahe, on the basis of > >nothing but whose naked-eye observations, Kepler worked out the theory > >of elliptical planetary orbits. > > Impressive, true, but I once got my hands on a book on celestial mechanics that > derived the fact of elliptical orbits (and the "equal areas in equal times" > principle) starting with nothing but the fact that gravity is in inverse-square > proportion to distance....r but Kepler didn't know that. it took Newton to figure it out. > > -- > "Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly." > - Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
From: Michael Stemper on 26 Feb 2010 12:52
In article <7uomssFvk0U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Robert Bannister <robban1(a)bigpond.com> writes: >tony cooper wrote: >> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:14:04 +0800, Robert Bannister <robban1(a)bigpond.com> wrote: >>> Ant�nio Marques wrote: >>> >>>> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal and >>>> Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. >>> Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even >>> wanted a church. >> >> I thought he delegated the job to Peter. > >I don't think so. I believe he did ask Peter and the others to keep on >spreading the word, but I have seen no mention of churches, priests, >buildings, vestments or choir boys in the New Testament. Try Mt 16:17-18. -- Michael F. Stemper #include <Standard_Disclaimer> This sentence no verb. |