Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- From: "*** rD" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:24:54 +0100
"Spoonfed" <jonathan.doolin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1118417283.823270.75530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
| *** rD wrote:
| > "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
| > in message news:p8Dpe.6702$OP.504@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1118130196.430100.67420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > <<
| > | > I am currently studying
| > |
| > | You are too stupid for that.
| > |
| > | Dirk Vdm
| > |
| >
| > Thanks Dirk but surely the amount of gain you get from study is
inversely
| > proportional to your level of stupidity so I will only had to study a
very
| > small amount to gain a massive amount of stupidity and be equal to you ?
| > --
| > D & R *** E-field = Electric field, M-field =Magnetic field, two
unbound
| > field effects
| > http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
| > Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
| > ah.{:-)
|
| I think I heard a study that said that people learn the fastest when
| they already know 80% of what they are being told. In high school, I
| found that they spent about 80% of each year in math classes repeating
| what they did the year before. In getting my Master's degree in
| Physics, on the other hand, I had some classes where I had heard
| perhaps 20% of information before. I found I learned faster this way,
| but it was difficult to assimilate.
|
| Up until I was working on my Master's degree, I didn't realize quite
| how much difference the competence and personality of the professor
| made. When you already know 80% of the information, you gain just as
| much by independent study. If you only know 20% you're just as
| unlikely to move toward competency as the original discoverers.
|
| When these original discoverers discovered an idea, it generally
| involved a lot of their own presumptions fitting into place, luckily or
| by design. It involved a series of questions they asked themselves
| over time, throughout their lives, and found answers to, whether
| documented or not--answers led to more questions, each more specialized
| and less connected to our mundane existence.
|
| Each person is naturally compelled to be curious about certain
| subjects, and they may develop their own jargon and mode of thinking
| about those subjects. If they get their higher education in those
| subjects, they will appear to be very intelligent because they will
| already have an infrastructure to place the ideas they hear at school.
| If they get their higher education in subjects they have not thought so
| much about, they may appear to be stupid, because they are attempting
| to memorize ideas which bear no relation to themselves.
|
If its any help I have never been formaly educated in anything {:-)
--
D & R *** E-field = Electric field, M-field =Magnetic field, two unbound
field effects
http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
ah.{:-)
.
- References:
- Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- From: *** rD
- Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- From: Spoonfed
- Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- Prev by Date: Re: gyroscope levitation based on fluid or particle accelerators
- Next by Date: Re: Imagine i , j, (-1)^-2
- Previous by thread: Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- Next by thread: Re: Calculating v[t], x[t], and t'[t] for an constant accelerated object.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
