The Cambridge Chat Thread

alex_hk90

With that kind of error margin being described as "give or take", you should've been an economist. :yep:

Were you playing today?
If so, which one were you? :p:

Reply 6461

alex_hk90

With that kind of error margin being described as "give or take", you should've been an economist. :yep:

Reply 6462

smilepea

Drunk a bit?

and errr what?!

Yeah, apparently.

I would quite like to try makeup applied by non-drunk people though.

Reply 6463

Craghyrax

Scipio90

That's pretty bad understanding of science. As far as we know, general relativity is true. As far as we know., quantum electrodymanics is correcxt. as far as we know, scincen works.

But the 'as far as we know' is because you haven't found anything to disprove it yet. Whereas the sucralose imitates sugar in the body and still produces insulin spikes despite not actually being sugar, and getting converted into fat. And its the impact of insulin spikes on the body which is meant to be causing all the issues.

As for whether the sucralose might cause any other nasty long term side effects - sure if sucralose was the first sweetner we'd ever tried and things seemed to be working ok, it would be reasonable to assume innocent until proven guilty. Only sucralose is the most recent of a whole family of sweetners most of which have been found decades later to cause all sorts of other health defects. So there is ample reason to be cautious.

And my understanding of science is fine, thankyou. I've written essays celebrating the Habermas's mode of inquiry for defending the recognition within the social sciences that everything we 'know' may at any time be displaced in the face of new findings. Its only the number crunching I don't get on with :shifty:

*wonders if all of the rude posts she's read by Scipio had been posted when he was drunk*

Reply 6464

smilepea

Scipio90

Yeah, apparently.

I would quite like to try makeup applied by non-drunk people though.

You scare me too much, I now refuse to sit with you in lectures.

Reply 6465

smilepea

You scare me too much, I now refuse to sit with you in lectures.

Reply 6466

Craghyrax

BigFudamental

Double T and you get the same depth over 8 subjects. People here spend, what, 3 hours a day in school?

I think you may have something there in that my A levels certainly took a hell of alot less time at college than primary school did as a child. I remember only having about 16 timetabled hours!

Reply 6467

Craghyrax

I think you may have something there in that my A levels certainly took a hell of alot less time at college than primary school did as a child. I remember only having about 16 timetabled hours!

That's per week I'm assuming?

(If the question sounds stupid I'm just asking because at my school we had a bizarre 8 day "week", weekends excluded, so your timetable ran from monday to wednesday the following week, then from thursday and so on)

Reply 6468

alex_hk90

Slumpy

Were you playing today?
If so, which one were you? :p:

Unfortunately I was not required today. :frown:

I think our captain is punishing me for never attending Sunday training sessions. :p:

How did we do?

BigFudamental

Wait, are you an Economist?

Reply 6469

alex_hk90

Unfortunately I was not required today. :frown:

I think our captain is punishing me for never attending Sunday training sessions. :p:

How did we do?

Alas, another defeat at our hands for you not being there!:P:
7-2 to us :wink:

Reply 6470

alex_hk90

Wait, are you an Economist?

It's complicated...

Reply 6471

An interesteting question:

What does P = A and/or B actually mean?

Does it mean (A and B) or (A or B), in which case it's equivalent to A or B, making the "and" redundant?

Reply 6472

Scipio90

An interesteting question:

What does P = A and/or B actually mean?

Does it mean (A and B) or (A or B), in which case it's equivalent to A or B, making the "and" redundant?

The latter, but only in logic speak.

Reply 6473

Scipio90

An interesteting question:

What does P = A and/or B actually mean?

Does it mean (A and B) or (A or B), in which case it's equivalent to A or B, making the "and" redundant?

Or doesn't necesarilly imply the possibility of both(for instance, as I've done too much linear algebra recently, if f:V-->W is a linear map, an element v in V is in the kernel of f, or in the image of f, can't be both), so the and is not redundant.

Edit-wrote bother instead of both!

Reply 6474

Slumpy

Or doesn't necesarilly imply the possibility of both

Surely it does, since T or T = T, you mean xor for the algebra thing?

Reply 6475

Scipio90

Surely it does, since T or T = T, you mean xor for the algebra thing?

Sorry, are you using 'or' in an equivalent way to set theory 'or'?
In which case, of course you're right, because 'or' means there 'and/or'.

Reply 6476

Slumpy

Sorry, are you using 'or' in an equivalent way to set theory 'or'?
In which case, of course you're right, because 'or' means there 'and/or'.

I'm using or to be

T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F

I'm tired.

Scipio90

An interesteting question:

What does P = A and/or B actually mean?

Does it mean (A and B) or (A or B), in which case it's equivalent to A or B, making the "and" redundant?

When we say "or", we mean usually mean a logical XOR (one or the other exclusively, not both).

"and/or" is like a logical OR, it requires at least one input to be true (in other words only A, only B, or A AND B)

Reply 6479