Sentences with phrase «get good approximations»

Engineers utilize the ideal gas laws as it is easier to work with and provides as a tool to get good approximations of real gas behavior.

@ Kenrick I need some help with the above formula because you really can not divide eternity by a cardinal number however we could fold eternity 7 times and get a good approximation of the disproportionate risk Chuckles takes by living only for today.

There is good information on the number of persons naturalized in each state going back more or less indefinitely, which when compared to the number of foreign born people in each state can be used to determine the percentage of foreign born adults in each state who are not U.S. citizens, and extrapolated to the county level foreign born statistics to get a good approximation of the number of adult non-citizens in each county in the U.S. Just under half of foreign born persons are naturalized U.S. citizens.

Multiply these two numbers together to get a good approximation of the total number of seeds.

Similarly, in my paintings and in physics, the story usually ends way before the solution, and it depends on the physicist's imagination to get a good approximation.

For simplicity you can add these tax rates together to get a good approximation.

Not exact matches

Getting an approximate model, however, is beneficial as long as the approximation is close enough to make good predictions, Nemenman says.

«But we want to see if we can get a good enough approximation with our method to deliver a practical result.»

And the result is that even though there are differences among species and even though populations are impacted by unpredictable forces, we can get away with a simple zero - sum - game as a good approximation of reality.

To a good approximation, the Earth gets all its energy from the sun in the form of short - wave solar radiation (sun light).

Actually, though, most of the OLR originates from below the tropopause (can get up around 18 km in the tropics, generally lower)-- with a majority of solar radiation absorbed at the surface, a crude approximation can be made that the area emitting to space is less than 2 * (20/6371) * 100 % ~ = 0.628 % more than the area heated by the sun, so the OLR per unit area should be well within about 0.6 % of the value calculated without the Earth's curvature (I'm guessing it would actually be closer to if not less than 0.3 % different).

Sometimes the formula used will be approximations in one form or another for the sake of simplifying calculations, but they will be good approximations, not something which was simply thrown in there to get the results one wants.

Perhaps, that I knew this, is what helped me better picture what Jelbring was saying, because that is the main «greenhouse» gas and without it we have a good approximation to Jelbring's dry atmosphere of his model, a step in getting to his model.

It is getting past the «getting started» phase where better approximations become necessary.

eadler2, In case you get over your approximation phobia, here those silly trends from the Oppo IPWP with BEST land and the NH / SH ocean SSTs

Mixing different data sources is less than ideal, but the fact that we both got essentially the same results, plus the fairly good match with HadCRUT4, makes me happy enough with it as a rough approximation.

Getting back to the main point of the paper, it should be obvious from the figure above that the first equation is not a good approximation of the second, because the entrainment term is not a major player and it certainly is not acting to balance the buoyancy acceleration.

Given that, if one wants freedom of choice and an efficient market, shouldn't one accept a market solution (tax / credit or analogous system based on public costs, applied strategically to minimize paperwork (don't tax residential utility bills — apply upstream instead), applied approximately fairly to both be fair and encourage an efficient market response (don't ignore any significant category, put all sources of the same emission on equal footing; if cap / trade, allow some exchange between CO2 and CH4, etc, based CO2 (eq); include ocean acidification, etc.), allowing some approximation to that standard so as to not get very high costs in dealing with small details and also to address the biggest, most - well understood effects and sources first (put off dealing with the costs and benifits of sulphate aerosols, etc, until later if necessary — but get at high - latitude black carbon right away)?

They also intuitively understand the core ideas from general systems theory — that you can get good models of system - level processes even when many of the sub-systems are poorly understood, as long as you're smart about choices of which approximations to use.

The good news is (at least from the perspective of science) that the role of carbon dioxide in climate change is very well established — at the theoretical level in terms of quantum physics, at the experimental level in terms of the study of the absorbtion and re-emission of radiation by carbon dioxide, at the numerical level (when equations get a little too complicated — but a good approximation can result from intensive computation by means of our fairly advanced computers), in terms of historical trends going back more than 500,000 years — and countless studies.

The Earth - Moon doesn't orbit the Earth - Moon - Sun barycenter exactly but it is not orbiting the barycenter of the solar sysem either; to some approximation the innermost planets and the sun must wobble around the barycenter together as they are similarly affected by the outermost planets which happen to be more massive as well as more distant and thus dominate in their effects on the barycenter — things should tend to get more complicated when the planets involved are at more similar distances.

If the Inquiry is to get at the best approximation to truth, it will need to ensure the residents and their families cooperate with it.