Connect Ps3 To Pc Adhoc

Everyone says that something is proven, some more ignorant say that something is "scientifically proven." But in reality no notion of what they want to express, sometimes I think they mean, "I say is true and I give my authority for truth value."
But in mathematics the idea of \u200b\u200bthe show is something that is in the very beginning of it. How can we show that something is false or true without any doubts? That problem is what the Greeks began raised. And for that first had to know how we reason. They did not know it, but realized that the argument had certain general laws and tried to machine them.
encode syllogisms Aristotle and Euclid encode geometry. And that's where the matter would be many centuries before someone made a breakthrough in the study of axiomatic reasoning.
(After the Greek humanity was apparently the victim of a virus that affected his brain and went crazy with religion, but of which we are not yet completely free, but since the fifteenth century a larger number people have been saved from infection.)
But the real revolution in this field began in the nineteenth century when other classes were discovered that were not Euclidean geometry.
(To understand your confusion, you must be at that time and wonder how there may be other kinds of points and lines in a unique reality?)
Logic For it was a heavy blow, since she does not reassemble itself from the many paradoxes of the concept of limit in calculus, they left several geometries with a body full axiomatic.
But what really blew it all were the work of Cantor about infinity and numbers after infinite, which led him to set theory based on logic (or rather the encoding of Boole and De Morgan ) other mathematicians continued to make progress together mixing theory with formal reasoning and numbers (such as Peano ) to know it's a show and what are the limits of the demonstrations.
But the whole theory was bringing its own share of paradoxes. The most famous is that of Russell , in which the sets. In which the non-joint (non-members) to itself.
It's like the set of all men is not a man. Luis whole, not me. (People are not sets)
But there are joint devour itself. As the set of all sets, which include yourself to end up creating paradoxes.
Then there are two kinds of sets, the currents that are not included. And they eat themselves, which are included in the set, the logical step was to unite these two types of sets. For example Q, is the set of all ordinary sets.

It is clear that Q is a paradox, and we ask the question "What kind of set is Q, the ordinary or that autodevoran?" We realize that it is neither (to make the test and will see it)
That led to many logicians and mathematicians have tried to make a mathematical free of paradoxes.
The greatest effort is made Russell and whitehead in his masterpiece "Principia mathematics " The idea was to make a style epimenes mathematics without paradoxes, which is something like "this sentence is false." And also the variants that have no apparent paradoxes. As this
A.-The statement that follows is false
b. "The above statement is true.
If we take each one of them isolated, there is no problem in fact commonly used until the problem begins with each one of them says to another, and that's the problem of self-reference.
Russell saw that it was the cause of all evil and so his attempt to make a free math them
The way to avoid formation of paradoxes in set theory and that of the numbers was quite elegant, but too artificial. It was the theory of types.
This is the simplest set consisted only of specific things that could not be subdivided into sets, the following could only be formed by simple sets, and continues that way. Clearly
seen thus avoiding sets as Q, since none can belong to himself and that is prohibited.
But Epimenides paradox style continued as
And when he began publishing his work a lanky young mathematician realized that there was something terribly wrong with all this and set out to prove it was Kurt Godel, as I have seen in several places referred to his discovery, but often not well explained. Or make it very lightly, so that only ends in a cartoon.
The incompleteness theorem is known by few people, despite their importance in almost all areas, it is extrapolated that shamelessly, I do it myself. But I will try to formally explain what are the limits you set.

philosophy, philosophy, science , science ,

How To Write A Letter Of Reconsideration

The space hotel scam

A English group is creating a project to build a hotel in space more or less about 450km above the surface. Lei
me the news and enthusiasm, as I like to go. But just lei website I realized it's a scam. And if it is very difficult.
The idea of \u200b\u200bthem, I guess ignorant and creating an image falsely idyllic feel to the space port on a Caribbean island, it seemed reasonable to me because it is closer to the Ecuador (and therefore NEED TO less energy to reach orbit) also had the advantage of warm beaches in the hotel of land in a Caribbean island.
And the method to reach the orbit is magnetic levitation and rockets. An electromagnetic rail track with a acceleration of the spacecraft to reach the speed of sound, and then turn on the rockets. That seemed great, the amount of energy is reduced greatly. But ... ..
And there's the paste, and so I say it's a scam . The least likely place to make a space port is the Caribbean, as is the way to several hurricanes a year, and either one can destroy the facility. Of course you may be landing elsewhere, and to land in the middle of a hurricane no is something easy
But let's assume that half have contingency to avoid the hurricane destroyed the space port. The magnetic levitation
, and more if they want to raise a ship of about 2 or 3 tons NEED TO much energy. But I'm talking serious power, perhaps enough electricity to light a town of about 12,000 people per shot or more, something reasonable would be about 20.000 people.
Where will that energy? Fuel a power plant would be large, expensive and under used most of the time. No talk of a nuclear reactor, would be madness and costs would skyrocket.
Where do you think make that electricity? That
do not say.
And I doubt that they can get.
But even in the unlikely event that succeeded, that method of magnetic levitation at sea level is inefficient, because the spacecraft will oppose a greater amount of atmosphere. That would increase the amount of energy needed, but also heat the craft much more.
A method of magnetic levitation to put into orbit satellites or ships would be more effective if done from a high place. Say
space 3600mts port is a high, the amount of atmosphere would be much lower, and also the air is much less opposed to the progress of the ship. South of Bogota
much closer to Ecuador and several stop to that height or higher, large enough to make a track more than 3 km long. Since there would be much less energy to operate the maglev and if they make a power plant for the rest of the time functions can sell that electricity to neighboring villages.
Here in Venezuela on the Butt paramo zones are large enough to make the space port, but in Bogota is more about Ecuador.
If I were in Africa in Kenya, Burundi and Congo have the same high mountains to ahcer port space of these features would be even better because it would give currency to these very poor countries.
also may be on the island of New Guinea has stopped and is quite exotic high place. But do not tell me what they do on a Caribbean island. That is false, and if enpeñan failed.
My hypothesis is more credible than a simple scam to grab the unwary, with money and little scientific training to realize the obvious kits that have this project.
The official website of the project "scam is http://www.galacticsuite.com/
science, science , aerospace, science ,