You have a technical mind, don't you? - page 32

New comment
 
Aleksey Nikolayev:

The spiritual children of popular academician Lysenko

Take care of the moles, they are our future.

6k

 
kran.bara:
  1. There is a lack of preparedness, perseverance, intelligence and diligence on his part" With this I completely agree.
  2. There is no forex market mystery! Well this is personally an ambiguous issue for me. If I offer you a little fact, will you comment on it?

Trial is not a loss - lay it out!

 
aleger:

Trial is not a loss - set it out!

So he was banned, how will he respond?

 
Uladzimir Izerski:

So he was banned, how will he respond?

So did he make a mistake? Was it for what?

 
Here's a dangerous question for you))))
Which is more accurate, nature or physics?

 
Aliaksandr Hryshyn:
Here's a dangerous question for you))))
Which is more accurate, nature or physics?

Physics translates as "nature" )))))))

If you mean the modern science of physics, then naturally, nature is more exact, in the sense that the latter is absolute and is not a model. And proceeding from modern pearls alya "wormholes", "dark matter", "dark energy", "4-dimensional space", "curvature of space", "strings", "straight-line curve", "a segment consists of points of zero diameter", it is possible to understand that the fundamental science of physics together with mathematics and geometry has turned the vector of development towards science-fiction.

Although, recently I watched a video on YouTube "Proofs that we are in a matrix and our world is a program" (not verbatim), so convincingly they say about it)

 
Ivan Butko:

If you mean the modern science of physics, then of course nature is more accurate, in the sense that the latter is absolute and not a model. And based on modern pearls alya "wormholes", "dark matter", "dark energy", "4-dimensional space", "curvature of space", "strings", "curve-line", "segment consists of points of zero diameter", one can understand that the fundamental science of physics together with mathematics and geometry has turned the development vector towards science fiction.

And what do you think about the modern proof of Fermat's great theorem? Surely you have your own proof for it - a shorter and more elegant one.

 
Aleksey Nikolayev:

What do you think of the modern proof of Fermat's great theorem? Surely you have your own proof for it - a shorter and more elegant one.

I'm not omnipresent, don't flatter me.

 
Ivan Butko:

Physics means "nature" ))))))).

If you mean the modern science of physics, then of course nature is more accurate, in the sense that the latter is absolute and not a model.

Let it be that it is not, but what does precision have to do with it)? There is still half a step to go.
 
Aliaksandr Hryshyn:
Let it not be, but what does accuracy have to do with it)? There's still half a step to go.

I thought for you and decided that accuracy meant that science was error-free and objective. So what - with that)

1...252627282930313233
New comment