Curse = lambda { |a, b|
if (a.type_1 == Type::Ghost or a.Type_1 == Type::Ghost) then
a.take_damage(a.max_hp / 2).to_i; b.change_status(Effect::CRS)
else a.change_modifier("Attack", 1); a.change_modifier("Defense", 1); a.change_modifier("Speed", -1)
end
}
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-15 22:23
>>29
You should watch Wildberger's videos before making statements. Algebra is enough to do all 3d transformations, including rotations, without using sin/cos/Pi pseudoscience.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-15 22:26
>>29 Trig != Calc
You need calculus to calculate sin/cos (so called Cauchy's sequences converging to infinity).
# Q is a finite, non-empty set of states
# Γ is a finite, non-empty set of the tape alphabet/symbols
# b \in \Gamma is the blank symbol (the only symbol allowed to occur on the tape infinitely often at any step during the computation)
# \Sigma\subseteq\Gamma\setminus\{b\} is the set of input symbols
# q_0 \in Q is the initial state
# F \subseteq Q is the set of final or accepting states.
>>35 Not /prog/ related. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_lisp Gay lisp is a stereotypical speech attribute associated with gay males in English-speaking countries.
Several speech features are stereotyped as markers of gay male identity: careful pronunciation, wide pitch range, high and rapidly changing pitch, breathy tone, lengthened fricative sounds, and pronunciation of /t/ as /ts/ and /d/ as /dz/ (affrication).
It is often said that Turing machines, unlike simpler automata, are as powerful as real machines, and are able to execute any operation that a real program can. What is missed in this statement is that, because a real machine can only be in finitely many configurations, in fact this "real machine" is nothing but a linear bounded automaton. On the other hand, Turing machines are equivalent to machines that have an unlimited amount of storage space for their computations. In fact, Turing machines are not intended to model computers
The United States National Academy of Sciences states that "mathematics is in fact not science and should not be presented as such."[24] and that "the claims of mathematics lack empirical support and cannot be meaningfully tested."[24] According to Skeptic, the "mathematics gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics" and "seriously misrepresents physics."[57][58]
For a theory to qualify as scientific it must be:
* consistent (internally and externally)
* parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
* useful (describing and explaining observed phenomena)
* empirically testable and falsifiable
* based upon controlled, repeatable experiments
* correctable and dynamic (changing to fit with newly discovered data)
* progressive (achieving all that previous theories have and more)
* tentative (admitting that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)
For any hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet at least most, but ideally all, of the above criteria. The fewer which are matched, the less scientific it is. If it meets two or fewer of these criteria, it cannot be treated as scientific in any useful sense of the word.
Scientists have considered the hypotheses proposed by mathematics and have rejected them because of a lack of evidence. Furthermore, the claims of mathematics do not refer to natural causes and cannot be subject to meaningful tests, so they do not qualify as scientific hypotheses. In 1987, the United States Supreme Court ruled that mathematics is religion, not science, and cannot be advocated in public school classrooms.[59]
A summary of the objections to mathematics by scientists follows:
* Mathematics is not falsifiable : The axioms of infinity and the law of excluded middle as defined in mathematics are not falsifiable because no testable bounds can be imposed on the infinite set. In mathematics, the infinite set is defined as limitless, with the capacity to create (or not), through fiat alone, infinite universes, not just one, and endow each one with its own unique, unimaginable and incomparable character. It is impossible to disprove a claim when that claim as defined encompasses every conceivable contingency.[61]
* Mathematics violates the principle of parsimony : Parsimony favours those explanations which rely on the fewest assumptions. Scientists prefer explanations which are consistent with known and supported facts and evidence and require the fewest assumptions to fill remaining gaps. Many of the alternative claims made in mathematics retreat from simpler scientific explanations and introduce more complications and conjecture into the equation.[62]
* Mathematics is not, and cannot be, empirically or experimentally tested : Mathematics posits supernatural causes which lie outside the realm of methodological naturalism and scientific experiment. Science can only test empirical, natural claims.
* Mathematics is not correctable, dynamic, tentative or progressive : Mathematics adheres to a fixed and unchanging premise or "absolute truth", the postulates of "Set Theory," which are not open to change. Any evidence that runs contrary to that truth must be discarded.[citation needed] In science, all claims are tentative, they are forever open to challenge, and must be discarded or adjusted when the weight of evidence demands it.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-16 1:35
Okay, so you're making a tower defense game. You have an invader moving down the line and a tower shooting at him. The tower shoots a bullet. Using linear algebra, you can calculate where the invader will be in the time that it will take the bullet to get there, and move the bullet towards that point in the same time. BOOM. You're stuck. First of all, how much of the bullet's velocity is x, and how much is y? Second, to what angle do you rotate the bullet? That's trig. Really, really simple trig.
>>56
You should watch Wildberger's videos before making statements. Algebra is enough to do all 3d transformations, including rotations, without using sin/cos/Pi pseudoscience.
ONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVERONE WORD FORCED INDENTION OF THE CODE THREAD OVER
Mathematics proves solely through logic. Science uses solely empirical evidence, which is logically fallacious. Why? Because even if something happens every time you test it, no matter how many times you test it, it is not proof that it will happen again. I believe that's a form of induction fallacy...
Angle: A measure of inclination between two lines or surfaces with respect to each other, equal to the amount that one would have to be turned to point in the same direction as the other.
Velocity: Rate of change of distance over time, in a given direction.
The former you should know if you ever passed elementary school. The latter you should know if you ever took a damn physics class. >>61
Logic is the only way something can be proven, and is infallible. Any statement or expression that is not fallacious is correct without question.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-16 3:44
>Angle: A measure of inclination between two lines or surfaces with respect to each other, equal to the amount that one would have to be turned to point in the same direction as the other.
what is "point"?
what is "inclination"
what is "turned"?
>Velocity: Rate of change of distance over time, in a given direction.
what is "distance"?
Logic is the only way something can be proven, and is infallible.
define "proven"
define "infallible"
The former you should know if you ever passed elementary school. The latter you should know if you ever took a damn physics class.
Why should I? I'm atheist after all.
sin/cos/tan require belief in infinity. If you're sceptical, then you can't use them.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-16 3:53
sine can be finitely approximated and therefore requires no belief in infinitesmal quantities - you would know that if you actually went to college instead of basement dwelling
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-16 4:13
>>68
They why do you need Axiom of Infinity together with Axiom of Choice?
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-16 4:15
>>68 you actually went to college instead of basement dwelling
Wikipedia say that colleges are no better than a sunday school.