Comments for Learning Computation http://learningcomputation.com/blog There exist problems, intractable to decide, yet easy to check. Fri, 07 May 2010 22:25:51 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Hello, WordPress by Your Daughter http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2010/05/hello-wordpress.html/comment-page-1#comment-116 Your Daughter Fri, 07 May 2010 22:25:51 +0000 http://learningcomputation.com/blog/?p=252#comment-116 HI DAD!!!! Nice to see that you're FINALLY doing this again!!! The last post you made besides this one was in December 08! Such a long time ago! HI DAD!!!! Nice to see that you’re FINALLY doing this again!!! The last post you made besides this one was in December 08! Such a long time ago!

]]> Comment on Counter-intuitive science by Anonymous http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/12/counter-intuitive-science.html/comment-page-1#comment-111 Anonymous Tue, 12 May 2009 08:41:57 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/counter-intuitive-science#comment-111 Angular momentum is very well explained in Feynman's lectures. No mystery left. Angular momentum is very well explained in Feynman’s lectures. No mystery left.

]]> Comment on The slow, inevitable decay unto death by Peter http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2007/02/slow-inevitable-decay-unto-death.html/comment-page-1#comment-46 Peter Sat, 02 May 2009 09:26:56 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2007/02/14/the-slow-inevitable-decay-unto-death#comment-46 I little late comment here...<br /><br />Naur is either a rambling, angry fool or a great genius. We will know in 20 years. I am currently writing a master thesis based on his synapse-state theory and I am still unsure about Naur and his theory (I need not a 'correct' theory in order to write a master thesis, I just need to show that I can use and be critical of a theory - any theory.). <br /><br />It is correct to say that Naurs synapse-state theory can explain a very large amount of human phenomena and activity; and in great detail. I can only say that nothing like it exist in psychology at all.<br /><br />I will see you here again in 20 years. I little late comment here…

Naur is either a rambling, angry fool or a great genius. We will know in 20 years. I am currently writing a master thesis based on his synapse-state theory and I am still unsure about Naur and his theory (I need not a ‘correct’ theory in order to write a master thesis, I just need to show that I can use and be critical of a theory – any theory.).

It is correct to say that Naurs synapse-state theory can explain a very large amount of human phenomena and activity; and in great detail. I can only say that nothing like it exist in psychology at all.

I will see you here again in 20 years.

]]> Comment on Circular Puzzle by Anonymous http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/04/circular-puzzle.html/comment-page-1#comment-97 Anonymous Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:22:55 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/circular-puzzle#comment-97 A convenient thought experiment is the following: suppose the inner circle had radius approaching zero. Then it is immediate that you need one rotation around the axis just to get back to position. A convenient thought experiment is the following: suppose the inner circle had radius approaching zero. Then it is immediate that you need one rotation around the axis just to get back to position.

]]> Comment on Math and Sudoku by Anonymous http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2006/01/math-and-sudoku.html/comment-page-1#comment-29 Anonymous Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:58:01 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/math-and-sudoku#comment-29 I have a neat Sudoku applicationfor Windows, it includes the abilityto create a puzzle to solve on a PC,store, or EMail it. It has featuresincluding HINT and AUTOSOLVE, coloring, etc. Contact me atervnork@excite.com and I'll Emaila Zip file to you with Demo puzzlesincluded. I have a neat Sudoku applicationfor Windows, it includes the abilityto create a puzzle to solve on a PC,store, or EMail it. It has featuresincluding HINT and AUTOSOLVE, coloring, etc. Contact me atervnork@excite.com and I’ll Emaila Zip file to you with Demo puzzlesincluded.

]]> Comment on Counter-intuitive science by Kurt http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/12/counter-intuitive-science.html/comment-page-1#comment-112 Kurt Tue, 09 Dec 2008 02:41:57 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/counter-intuitive-science#comment-112 Thanks! Thanks!

]]> Comment on Counter-intuitive science by Anonymous http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/12/counter-intuitive-science.html/comment-page-1#comment-113 Anonymous Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:20:35 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/counter-intuitive-science#comment-113 Nice writeup and well thought out. DDWFTTW(Directly downwind faster than the wind) has been done so many times now by so many different people that I no longer consider it a physics experiment, but rather a sociological one -- the point of your article.JB Nice writeup and well thought out. DDWFTTW(Directly downwind faster than the wind) has been done so many times now by so many different people that I no longer consider it a physics experiment, but rather a sociological one — the point of your article.JB

]]> Comment on Circular Puzzle by Anonymous http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/04/circular-puzzle.html/comment-page-1#comment-98 Anonymous Tue, 30 Sep 2008 05:21:32 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/circular-puzzle#comment-98 The question is how many times does the the smaller circle rotate around its OWN axis to cover the distance. Therefore, the answer is three. If the smaller circle did not rotate around its own axis but still traveled once around the bigger circle, it would have rotated once. However, the amount of times it rotated around its OWN axis would still be zero. The degrees of rotation of the smaller ball as it turns around its axis does not get further increased based on its position on the bigger ball. The question is how many times does the the smaller circle rotate around its OWN axis to cover the distance. Therefore, the answer is three. If the smaller circle did not rotate around its own axis but still traveled once around the bigger circle, it would have rotated once. However, the amount of times it rotated around its OWN axis would still be zero. The degrees of rotation of the smaller ball as it turns around its axis does not get further increased based on its position on the bigger ball.

]]> Comment on Circular Puzzle by ken http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/04/circular-puzzle.html/comment-page-1#comment-99 ken Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:37:29 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/circular-puzzle#comment-99 agree with arvindn that it depends on the observer or the frame of reference. it's a different answer if you are observing from outside of big/small circle, observing within the small circle or observing from within the big circle. Or if we claim that the observer is rolling together with the small circle, then the answer is 0? Or if the observer is rolling infinitely faster than the small circle, then the answer is infinity.Anyway, it's a SAT math question and not a language question. While 4 or 2 should be correct for the math genius, it shouldn't penalize the most common answer (2*pi*3)/(2*pi*1) = 3. agree with arvindn that it depends on the observer or the frame of reference. it’s a different answer if you are observing from outside of big/small circle, observing within the small circle or observing from within the big circle. Or if we claim that the observer is rolling together with the small circle, then the answer is 0? Or if the observer is rolling infinitely faster than the small circle, then the answer is infinity.Anyway, it’s a SAT math question and not a language question. While 4 or 2 should be correct for the math genius, it shouldn’t penalize the most common answer (2*pi*3)/(2*pi*1) = 3.

]]> Comment on Circular Puzzle by Ian Young http://learningcomputation.com/blog/2008/04/circular-puzzle.html/comment-page-1#comment-100 Ian Young Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:08:15 +0000 http://learningcomputation.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/circular-puzzle#comment-100 Actually an even simpler answer comes to mind: if you plot it on a line, the answer is three. But then consider that to get the endpoints to touch, you have to rotate one end through 360 degrees, adding a rotation. Actually an even simpler answer comes to mind: if you plot it on a line, the answer is three. But then consider that to get the endpoints to touch, you have to rotate one end through 360 degrees, adding a rotation.

]]>