Sentences with phrase «so simple an equation»

Not exact matches

Mandelbrot set images are produced by taking a simple equation, plugging in a number and then taking the result and plugging it back into the simple equationt - and then taking... so on and so forth.

So my gripe is not with dualism per se, but with the simple equation of Gnosticism and dualism.

So after posting my simple breakfast muesli, I thought I'd share with you my equation for the perfect muesli blend.

In the UK, complex arithmetic is taught in schools much later than it is in America, but simple algebra is introduced in the early years, in concrete forms that give young children the important concepts so that they do not become afraid of equations and unknown letters when, later on, they reach more complex algebra.

«In the past, researchers either ignored the vertical flow because they thought it was not important, or they used simpler equations because it was so difficult to model,» Hassanzadeh said.

Although the simple Lanchester equations with constant coefficients remain useful for demonstrating some features of combat (e.g., the value of concentrating effort and the associated penalty for breaking up one's forces), especially when it is desirable to do so analytically, they are a poor basis for describing most combat situations.

The logic behind this equation is so simple and elegant that it's difficult to disagree.

A more simple way to average out this equation is to simply divide your weight in pounds by 2, so an adult weighing 150 pounds would therefore require 75grams of protein; a happy medium.

Four games to play to reinforce solving simple equations and substitution, so quite suitable for year 6 and key stages 3 or 4.

It is a simple equation: You need to spend less money on day - to - day expenses so you can put more money toward your holiday debt.

The equation is not so simple when you go to buy for your pooch.

So then, your contention is that when Galileo — that investigator so beloved and supposedly emulated by by deniers in other contexts — after having spent much time and effort showing that balls rolling down inclined planes followed a simple x * x equation he could not assume to have found a fundamental process at worSo then, your contention is that when Galileo — that investigator so beloved and supposedly emulated by by deniers in other contexts — after having spent much time and effort showing that balls rolling down inclined planes followed a simple x * x equation he could not assume to have found a fundamental process at worso beloved and supposedly emulated by by deniers in other contexts — after having spent much time and effort showing that balls rolling down inclined planes followed a simple x * x equation he could not assume to have found a fundamental process at work?

In response to Mike Roddy, The housing equation is not so simple.

«Further Uses of Primitive Calculations By the 1970s,... scientists were starting to see that the climate system was so rich in feedbacks that a simple set of equations might not give an approximate answer, but a completely wrong one.

It seems so simple when you do the equations.

So this is our simple proposal — a new equation for estimating the internal heat gains in PHPP when designing a passive house.

So, just because there is all this complexity of diurnal cycles etc, doesn't necessarily mean the simple equation is wrong — or right.

Resolving algebraic equation on a grid is a so simple a task that there can't be any problem with the code.

So, the physics should condense to a very simple relationship, if you put the intensive factor f * -LRB-(570-80/490) into equation 4 the fraction becomes dimensionless, where f is Fractional part of ice / water in system, f = 1 assuming all water is converted to ice in the ascending wall, it would place a break to maximum wind speed but also slow down the hurricane rate of formation.

So we can use simple calculus to write some equations of radiative transfer.

But what would be even more useful is for you to address the various points made, especially about your theory that — so far — waiting on your explanation — fails the basic test of putting together simple equations.

Parker Pope states that, «because so many variables in the marriage - and - divorce equation are changing, a simple calculation comparing marriages and divorces in a given year ends up distorting the result and suggesting that the divorce rate is higher than it really is.»