Meijer are substantially more general than hypergeometric. The idea was basically to have the most general function, that you can use to express the most number of other functions, while keeping the complexity from becoming too extreme.
Wait until you hear about Meijer G-functions. They're what most computer algebra systems use to represent a whole bunch of special functions.
Meijer G-functions. They are the everything functions, they also include the hypergeometrics. Very scary, but they underpin CAS.
Finally, the probability is never a real, measurable thing. You can't measure a probability, you only measure outcomes, and then you can talk about confidence in certain outcomes.
The subjective observer will of course come up with probabilities according to Born's rule to maintain continuity. But the god's eye view shows that both things actually happen, in the sense that they are both parts of the wave function.
What do you mean? The gods-eye view sees a wavefunction. Parts of it are interpreted as measurement A, parts of it are measurement B, but both are deterministically there. A subjective observer "riding" the wavefunction will deterministically land in both areas.
Well, in that view there are no probabilities, there's only the wavefunction evolving deterministically. Randomness is only felt by a subjective observer. That's my understanding of it at least.
What do you mean from outside the system exactly? A god's eye view? Another subjective observer?
Actually the US passed an entire act that's all about giving themselves the right to invade the Hague, if that were ever to happen: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...
I mean, you have to accept something, or else your argument just starts turning into the problem of induction all over again (and it's not a very interesting problem imo).
The curse of confusing Greek for Latin strikes again!
> Goes to Iraq (NOT Iran) to commit war crimes
> Randomly drives into a river and dies
> "It's Iran's fault"
Damn you are spitting fire.
Something that comes to my mind very often lately is, there seem to be a lot of people who believe in the existence of hell that seem to fail to realize that the way they're acting would directly send them there if it was real.
Oh piss off, who bombed who first?
There are other countries with similar voting systems that don't have the same issue and vote for other parties as well. Again, you will NEVER even fix that with this approach, because you will keep getting blackmailed over and over again, forever.
The voting system trope is honestly at this point a tired excuse Americans always bring up, and it is exactly what I'm talking about. Nothing will ever happen if you always yield to this blackmail. You will never implement ranked choice either, and even then it won't do anything.
But Trump negotiated the withdrawal from Afghanistan, I even remember some democrats complaining about it. Biden followed through with Trump's plan, and then Trump blamed him for it anyways. There was never any chance Biden would have done anything else in terms of Gaza.
No, it is not, because politics isn't a one-off. Y'all are focused way too much on pulling levers than trying to figure out how to stop whomever is tying all these people on the tracks.
Oh fuck right off, nobody in the world believes your shit any more and you should all be ashamed.
This statement is basically "we are ok with only a little bit of dystopia" and they were rejected because the fascist American regime didn't just want a little bit.
Disgusting times we live in. I'm posting this because I'm expecting the "but Iran gave us no choice, they wouldn't yield" (as if countries are always supposed to yield to the US and Israel) crowd to start singing their tune any minute now.
Yeah because children aren't watching dozens of thirst traps every day on TikTok, it's some nude scene in classic literature that will break them.
What I mean is, maybe gender is implied in the surrounding lines. But eh I decided it doesn't matter at all, it's just my brain being very nitpicky for literally no reason.
Yeah but maybe the author just didn't think of it, idk.
Yeah, I agree. I'm just saying maybe we have to look at the context to be more conclusive! (Not that it matters very much).
Maybe if you could give a little bit more context around it I could tell you if there's gender in it. But yeah as it stands they're all like "walking into the same river twice is impossible".
Is it? I'm not well versed in that stuff, I know it's important for some anomaly stuff in physics, what else is it good for (in physics)?
I think it sometimes happens when people know something can be proved but can't be bothered to think about how.
That's interesting, I didn't know they produce that much, but apparently they consume more than 110000 barrels a day, and that's only that low because of recent shortages.
