"He will run yesterday" is future tense because the verb formation is the one for the future tense (will + INFINITIVE). "Yesterday" is not part of the tense. In meaning, the "yesterday" contradicts the tense but that's not a grammatical observation.

This is more true of Intel iGPUs. AMD APUs were actually designed for light gaming as their integrated GPUs actually had some power.

[removed]

Provided the scattering is random, or at least random enough given the sample size, then there’s not actually a statistical advantage to picking one letter vs picking a scatter.

Only slight advantage at just filling in a single letter is it saves time guessing if you’re real short on time.

If you ever do this though make sure you understand all the grading rules, some tests deduct points for incorrect answers.

> no known negative effects from inhaling glycerin vapours

From https://www.banyantreatmentcenter.com/2022/01/10/vaping-vegetable-glycerin-side-effects/ :

> Researchers have recently found that vegetable glycerin can lead to inflammation of the lungs due to long-term vaping or e-cigarette use. One study on the dangers of vaping glycerin ran for four weeks, during which 34 were randomized to using flavor- and nicotine-free e-cigs or to a control group of no-use. At the end of the study, researchers discovered that the side effects of inhaling vegetable glycerin included inflammation in the lungs. The study also found that those who smoked e-cigarettes twice a day for a month contained higher levels of chemicals like propylene glycol in their blood.1

Also see https://www.news-medical.net/news/20191018/Vaping-propylene-glycol-and-vegetable-glycerine-may-lead-to-lung-inflammation.aspx

Cultural identities cannot die so easily. Yes common language is important so many people learn English as a second language. For most culturally rich people their culture and traditions matter a lot and so a way of preserving them is by using the language.

If you don't produce you have no productivity.

Anyway the success of your doing is measurable.

• The Therapist by people that need no more therapie
• Bus driver by a low amount of bad reports
• Teacher by smart students that are Sucessfull in their next step of education/job.

Generally, your gut is correct: productivity is the measure of output over time. More output over the same time is higher productivity.

But industries without a hard output wouldn't be measured the same way. There isn't a concrete way to measure the productivity of teachers, though they could try to measure efficiency and extrapolate productivity from that (higher efficiency is "same output over less time" which is theoretically more productive).

So if you stood completely still in space, let's say ignoring any gravitational pull, your relativistic subjective time would pass faster than anything else's in the universe that's moving, which is pretty much everything since gravitational pull affects everything eventually even by the tiniest bit. However these differences are marginal until you hit speeds in the c-percentages so most objects wouldn't get to those speeds by accident, in comparison, the ISS travels at 8000m/s (or roughly 0.000027% of c) and has in its lifetime experienced roughly 1/10s in time dilation. So a human spending their entire life in a comparable orbit would get ~1s more subjective lifetime, compared to earth, accounting for all the bad stuff space does to your body, probably not worth it.

However the dilation is measurable and has to be accounted for e.g. by satellites because for electronics, these "rounding errors" can add up and cause problems.

There are ways to work with infinitesimal numbers just as with real numbers, but that does not really do the trick, as physics is not based on that. To my understanding (not an expert in cosmology or that deep into physics) the energies/fields of back then can cause infinite densities.

Its a statement that is so basic, you cannot prove it. Because it is (together with other axioms) the basis for every proof.

These are the "assumptions" we make in order to get startet with proving stuff. For example, in math there is an axiom "there exists (the concept of) infinity" You cannot really prove this without using other statements like it that can't be proven.

[removed]

I guess so, though I think it's being used wrong in that context. In the context of CPU/GPU, 'task switching' describes the hardware's ability to park a thread and start a different one executing.

In the case of the CPU, it has to dump cache to main memory, load new information and continue. Where the GPU, usually, is just like 'lol pause play!'

12 inches in a foot

3 feet in a yard

1760 yards in a mile

I don't see how this is multiples of 12 honestly.

There's two key movements that lead to the ban of Cannabis in the US.

The Temperance Movement and the War on Drugs.

The Temperance Movement started in the late 19th century worked to ban addictive substances which eventually culminated in Prohibition. But Alcohol usage was only one of many things the movement targeted. The US was also dealing with a serious problem of Opiate addiction in this era.

Prior to this drugs like Cannabis and Opiates were available over the counter and were frequently mixed with other products and tonics. Coca-Cola for example originally contained Cocaine. Laws passed in this era limited the availability of many of these drugs or outright banned them.

Cannabis specifically was effectively banned in the 30s due mostly to the efforts of Henry Anslinger the first Commissioner of the Bureau of Narcotics. He ran campaigns that linked Cannabis use to violent crime in the public eye, but most of his evidence was fabricated or heavily skewed with racist overtones.

But while banned, Cannabis was not yet a serious crime.

This changed during the Nixon Administration and his War on Drugs. Cannabis use became a serious crime punishable with mandatory sentences.

After Nixon's death several Cabinet officials in his administration came forward and confirmed that the real reason for the change in policy was so that Nixon could give Police carte-blanche to arrest certain troublesome groups, most notably Blacks and Hippies, that were protesting the War in Vietnam and the Civil Rights movement.

You couldn't arrest them for protesting, but you could arrest them for using their favorite drug.

Good question, sorry for not clarifying in my original post. An axiom is a statement that we take to be self-evident. I.e. it's a statement that we don't need to prove because we just ASSUME that it's true. Then, based on that assumption (i.e. axiom), we try to deduce certain conclusions.

This is also how we do things in geometry (and indeed every single branch of math)! You may have heard of Euclid's five postulates (another word for axiom). All of Euclidean geometry can be derived by using the five axioms that Euclid laid out some 2000 years ago.

However, it turns out that if you refuse to accept the fifth axiom of Euclid, then you can deduce/derive other kinds of geometries. These are called non-euclidean geometries.

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

Loaded questions are not allowed on ELI5. A loaded question is one that posits a specific view of reality and asks for explanations that confirm it. A loaded question, by definition, presumes that something must be true in order for the question to stand.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

And eyes are used for reading

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

Please read this entire message

Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).

Links without your own explanation or summary are not allowed. ELI5 is intended to be a subreddit where content is generated, rather than just a load of links to external content. A top-level reply should form a complete explanation in itself; please feel free to include links by way of additional context, but they should not be the only thing in your comment.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.

What does axiom mean?

GPUs are not better at floating point operations, they are just better at doing them in parallel as per SIMD just like any other operation benefitting from SIMD.

In fact floating point support is generally not quite as good as CPU. Some GPUs do not even natively support double precision or natively all floating point operations. Then there's denorm behavior and rounding modes that have been scattered across each implementation. Many GPUs take short cuts by not implementing a full FPU internally and convert to fixed point instead.

>Even at locally finite & bounded speed. >

How would that work? It seems like in the actual transition from a point into a space, speed wouldn't even be definable. Is there an explicit construction of such a contraction?

[removed]

[removed]