...yet. New questions have always existed, it's just a matter of solving them.Hmm... seems quite right. But really, some things just are without us knowing why.
...yet. New questions have always existed, it's just a matter of solving them.Hmm... seems quite right. But really, some things just are without us knowing why.
Actually, it does! That's why it's called "anti-matter", after all.Originally Posted by Brafil
The speed of light (and moreover, the measure of speed itself) is never negative - it's a scalar with an absolute value. So the expression E=[+-]mc˛ will always satisfy the relation sign(E) == sign(M).
Code:#include <cmath> #include <complex> bool euler_flip(bool value) { return std::pow ( std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), std::complex<float>(0, 1) * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0) *(1 << (value + 2))) ).real() < 0; }
Yes, which means the expression is meaningless and it has nothing to do with anti-matter.
It may make sense for calculations involving kinectic movement, because there you have to deal with concepts of acceleration, deceleration, and relative masses and energy. But otherwise there's no 2nd way of writing E = mc2.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
Unless c is imaginary.
Code://try //{ if (a) do { f( b); } while(1); else do { f(!b); } while(1); //}
Wow, you're right!
Code:#include <cmath> #include <complex> bool euler_flip(bool value) { return std::pow ( std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), std::complex<float>(0, 1) * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0) *(1 << (value + 2))) ).real() < 0; }
Glad to notice someone paying attention.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
I totally missed the joke(?).
Help me here...
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
