/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15714580
Don't know. Too complex for an analytical solution, at least when taken at face value... but since the result doesn't depend on any particular arrangement of points, shouldn't there be an equivalent geometric problem that doesn't involve random coordinates but only the underlying aspects that affect the result?

>>14847231
P -> Q = not (P and not Q)
This is not "implication" in the normal sense, since it doesn't posit a causal relationship between P and Q, but you can see the connection through that formulation: if P causes Q, it can't be that P is the case but not Q.

>>14740834
You're a physicalist, friend. Physicalists also believe there's just one kind of stuff: physical stuff, and the mind is made up of that stuff. They can't define what it means for stuff to be "physical stuff" any more than you can define what it means for stuff to be "mind stuff" and it's a moot distinction since there is only one kind of stuff, and everything is that kind of stuff.

>>14609049
Yep, enjoy your urban concentration camp, poorfag. Worst case scenario: I will be in the same position you're in minus 10 years of being a poor, frustrated, demoralized wagie. :^)