/sci/ - Science & Math

but careful to the bounds of a kind of reserved innate utilitarian style compromise that has action as the preliminary focus of its held narration, hence anything; now when facing a lock that can have its consistency in conceptual awareness raised by varying scales of keys depending on the scale of the frame, that the question arises, is the contraception of it's limitations more animated that the course of any action taken by it does, under the format of the nature of a formula being applied, the friction with the passive correlation of parallels of action and reaction derive a structure that has more of the availability of action or reaction to it's constants or less by the means of the suspension of the layering that would be so far contrived of a magnetic action that the delegation of premise of potential action being acted on survive a chaotic upheaval of self preservation that the coordination of the usage would suspend logic to the point of anything being a paradox of A: Shape, that it be have determinations aligning it to coordination, and B: Space, that it be consorting with itself beyond the means of suspension; leading into the point that what has depth has less and less potential use compared to what does, this can be seen from language to ground and with the innate recognizance of anything that the correspondence with use be that anything, structured in anyway, when use is applied, complies with grounds of scaling conditions so absurd that the compilation of them, anything to use, derives the vary consorted formula of a contraception of how expression can taper, at the start, and then as the depth of the error of the tapering concurers with the ease of the limit, hence progression that the depth of the tailoring begins to express itself, as to say when as the expression begins to wane does the conceptual output of the potential formats begin to focus in on what the courting maneuvers are in rational to what the scaling limit is.

#Engineering

>>7930158
Under the same philosophical principle as 10= 9.999...9000....000....

When a number repeats, on any scale, it compiles its previous entirety and scales it to 1 or 0
When this happens a process of elimination occurs:
>A:
That we become statisticians and collect, effectively, n^n data which sums 0 in a principle as the conditions of simple collection breeds the rest of the reality to carnate what it is carrying more quickly as the coordinates of its all being, as compared in a sort of void/non-relativity standard of being that permeates what is possessed by the scope of its perception; and that under the care of this math that reality...
>B:
determines that as there is something lost to something, that as slightly outlined in the previous sentiment, the amount of construction that is rallied by the dogma of loss, enables a recognition of what was there to a higher standard, and this....
>C:
brings fourth, to put it simply, chaos 'types', now this may seem silly to those of you who have pondered chaos and realized that it is singular, as otherwise it would just be a considered a mess, but back on point: these 'types' are formal deductions of various natures, behaviors, physical, recognizably, standards, magnetization: to put some of these relativities of mutation and measurement of reality types that are in the bounds of a chaos recognition and that...
>D:
as these things manifest before they carnate they contract and expand in ways that the traditional physicals of nature would find impossible- but again the type pattern that is held gives leeway for the nature of what the scaling of their frames of 'push' act on.... and in short, there is a phenomena on earth that has developed in every apex species that enables these constructions to pose delineation in the full maturity of a species, or it can be seen that they fool entropy into deriving one axis of a hole as another, but that's mass and is a story for another time.

What Makes a Character: Deriving Non-Conformity

In the reduction of rational, the standard definitions intention within personality gives the variance of the elementary rendition of persuasion within the characterization of the standardized environment of which can found to be deigned that of a 'fit' in a given grouping; this implies that when suspending the characterization of a study of a environment you will find a simplistic chain of redactions that correspond to bring to fruition only minor confrontation with each other, this set of variances is systematic with the nature of what makes some more agreeable to others and vice versa....

What Makes a Character: Deriving Non-Conformity

In the reduction of rational the standard definition intention within personality gives the variance of the elementary rendition of persuasion within the characterization of the standardized environment of which can be deigned that of a 'fit' in such; this implies that when suspending the characterization of a study of a environment you will find a simplistic chain of redactions that correspond with only minor confrontation with each other, this set of variances is systematic with the nature of what makes some more agreeable to others and vice versa.
Now, when adopting the premise that some of these elementary functions are to much of a supplicant to a point of over reacting to every sentiment and leaving no room for the confrontation that makes the grounds for scaled reaction or over baring to a point of leaving the rest of the groups set in a deformed wreck of insecurity does a balance begin to throw the boat of the group over like a wave leaving few traces of it having been in the first place and does each set of bodies acquire a new dimension of being that leaves for concurring elements of characterization to arise in their independent fermenting in which ever style they fall out into, this is a beautiful rendition of naturalization rational in group description, but I'll leave the semantics of that for another time; the point being made is that although non-conformity does exist, it doesn't exist very easily short of being groomed from birth and then placed with intention; and in this do we find that it's more social than that of being of more diverse interests or varying categorization of personal style.
What is it that makes the statement of being different; if anything it must be self definition, the difference between having the luster of depth that lets be that piece of stoniness of grounded platonicy with the fabrics of the world while still having a held belief of what could align them more justly...

>>7747328
> >>7747336
Literally everything would form a biological mainframe and creating life would be like working with playdoh, but, ordering that life would be like trying to make a relatively large body of elements come to life and not cringe at how crude it is; in short, you'd need something more like wisdom than intelligence when it came to following through on your actions

>>7642482
sorry, I'm dyslexic and it should be:.... putting or finding an opening on a closed set

>>7642638
>>7642642
Okay, say my set was 1,1 how would you go about defining a bridge to 1,<1

>>7626445
> >>7627332
Sorry to tear you up a little there but I like precision and I think about this stuff alot

>>7599629
sq'z any typos I just blazed through it

Someone plz fix /lit/
>>>/lit/6324219

I read somewhere that engineers don't use 90% of what they learn in college.
Is this true? If so, what are some skills that engineers use that I can learn?