Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- From: iqgoogol@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 4, 12:00 pm, af...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John Park) wrote:
(strich....@xxxxxxxxx) writes:
On Sep 4, 9:35=A0am, af...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John Park) wrote:
You really don't know anything about statistics, do you? =A0What's the st=andard normal distribution? =A0How is it used?
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --John Park
And you pretend to know?
Let's see, tell me, where did Eric pull that 2/3 value?
If you knew anything about the standard normal distribution, you wouldn't be
asking. Look it up.
--John Park
P.S. Idiot.
Really? I asked because I knew you cannot answer. And rightly so...
Everybody here knows that 'look it up' remark is standard evasive
response...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- From: John Park
- Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- References:
- Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- From: John Park
- Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- Prev by Date: solutions manual to Microelectronic circuits by R. Jaeger 3rd edition
- Next by Date: Re: STRICH Thread: Putting Relativity to Rest
- Previous by thread: Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- Next by thread: Re: Instantaneous is a lot "Faster" Than C!
- Index(es):