As far as i know, TeX is working with classical boolean logic which divides the world into true and false. Is it possible to improve TeX with the help of fuzzy logic, which is a non binary interpretation of the world?
In other words, does it make sense to write 3.2 βββ 4.8?
"Her clashes with Frey date back to her brief tenure with the city in 2017 and 2018, when Knuth spent seven months as chief resilience officer, a position tasked with helping the city navigate existing and future challenges. She was appointed to the role during former Mayor Betsy Hodges' tenure and left shortly after Frey took office. A spokesman for Frey's office said it became clear to the mayor at the time that Knuth "had failed to deliver any tangible work product" after almost eight months.
"There's the potential for analysis paralysis," said Otis Rolley, with the Rockefeller Foundation, which funded her post. "We thought more could and should have been done, and then when the new mayor came into office we were very frank and honest about our level of expectations."
Bender said Knuth's departure had to do with Frey's priorities and political connections rather than Knuth's performance. Knuth said she connected with more than 2,000 Minneapolis residents about the city's biggest challenges, but that Frey wasn't interested in that work and had a different vision."
https://www.startribune.com/kate-knuth-attempts-to-stand-out-in-minneapolis-mayor-s-race/600108837/
The Art of Computer Programming by Donald Knuth is famed artwork of a literature on Computer Science.
What are some other books in Computer Science which goes to similar depths and breadths like Donald Knuth?? (Could be in any field or domain relating to Computer Science)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtlbTpW8mU4&t=243s
Full Interview & Time Stamps on YouTube at #theSingularityLab
Hi,
During the interview to Kevin Knuth, it was mentioned that Bob Lazar claims that element 115 acts as some sort of catalyst between gravity and the strong force. I wanted to point out a line of research where this is sort of accomplished by seeing gravitons as a "double copy" of gluons. I link here a recent paper, but this has been explored for sever years by now.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rspa.2019.0722?af=R
Prof. Kevin Knuth presented dubious Ray Stanford UFO-evidence images and claims at the UAP session hosted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) on August 6, 2021. Prof. Knuth acknowledged that the images had not been independently validated, but then proceeded to use them as illustrations of "plasma sheath," "plasma beam ahead," and even possible "warp drive." I respect Prof. Knuth's past work, but in my informed personal opinion, it was a big mistake to utilize "evidence" produced by such a demonstrably untrustworthy source.
(I should disclose here that when I was a young fool in the 1970s, I was part of the core group of Ray Stanford's Project Starlight International, an editor of the Project Starlight International Journal of Instrumented UFO Research, and an editor of publications of the Stanford-centered Association for the Understanding of Man (A.U.M.). So my deep familiarity with Stanford's speeches, writings, interviews, and UFO-related claims, etc., is augmented by three and one-half years of personal association.)
So, what's wrong with Ray Stanford as a source of stories or images pertaining to UFO events? Well, Ray Stanford has, over a period of more than 6 decades, made an extraordinary number of untrustworthy public claims related to UFOs and aliens. It is hard to know where to begin. Perhaps with his numerous 1950s encounters with the "space brothers," as narrated in his 1958 book Look Up? That was followed by his career as a trance-channel for the august members of the "White Brotherhood" from 1960 until at least 1978 (age 40) -- including messages from "Aramda," a member of the extraterrestrial "Watchers," whom Stanford claimed (in a lecture) to have known for 38,000 years, and from "Jeshua" himself (AKA Jesus Christ). Let's not forget the "psychic readings" given by the "unconscious" Ray Stanford, telling the core group of Stanford's "Project Starlight International" that they would make direct contact with visiting aliens "if you persist.β (Spoiler: It did not happen.)
One cannot omit Stanford's 15 years of intermittently promoting construction of a very expensive device called "the Accelerator," which he described as "similar to a UFO," that would make an occupant into "a hyper person, a super person if you prefer," able to physically teleport into the distant past (yes, friends, a time machine). Stanford in 1974 told the members of the Association for the Understanding of Man that the Accele
... keep reading on reddit β‘On page 5 of the document listed here: https://www.kcats.org/csci/464/doc/knuth/fascicles/fasc3a.pdf
Is algorithm T and I am trying to understand how c[j] is used in it. It seems to be just an index referring to the position a number in a list but then I get confused when I am told to set c[j] to j-1. Can anyone help?
Prof. Kevin Knuth presented dubious Ray Stanford UFO-evidence images and claims at the UAP session hosted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) on August 6, 2021. Prof. Knuth acknowledged that the images had not been independently validated, but then proceeded to use them as illustrations of "plasma sheath," "plasma beam ahead," and even possible "warp drive." I respect Prof. Knuth's past work, but in my informed personal opinion, it was a big mistake to utilize "evidence" produced by such a demonstrably untrustworthy source.
(I should disclose here that when I was a young fool in the 1970s, I was part of the core group of Ray Stanford's Project Starlight International, an editor of the Project Starlight International Journal of Instrumented UFO Research, and an editor of publications of the Stanford-centered Association for the Understanding of Man (A.U.M.). So my deep familiarity with Stanford's speeches, writings, interviews, and UFO-related claims, etc., is augmented by three and one-half years of personal association.)
So, what's wrong with Ray Stanford as a source of stories or images pertaining to UFO events? Well, Ray Stanford has, over a period of more than 6 decades, made an extraordinary number of untrustworthy public claims related to UFOs and aliens. It is hard to know where to begin. Perhaps with his numerous 1950s encounters with the "space brothers," as narrated in his 1958 book LOOK UP? That was followed by his career as a trance-channel for the august members of the "White Brotherhood" from 1960 until at least 1978 (age 40) -- including messages from "Aramda," a member of the extraterrestrial "Watchers," whom Stanford claimed (in a lecture) to have known for 38,000 years, and from "Jeshua" himself (AKA Jesus Christ). Let's not forget the "psychic readings" given by the "unconscious" Ray Stanford, telling the core group of Stanford's "Project Starlight International" that they would make direct contact with visiting aliens "if you persist.β (Spoiler: It did not happen.)
One cannot omit Stanford's 15 years of intermittently promoting construction of a very expensive device called "the Accelerator," which he described as "similar to a UFO," that would make an occupant into "a hyper person, a super person if you prefer," able to physically teleport into the distant past (yes, friends, a time machine). Stanford in 1974 told the members of the Association for the Understanding of Man that the Accelerato
... keep reading on reddit β‘Full Interview & Time Stamps in main description on YouTube.
#theSingularityLab
https://reddit.com/link/pzai8j/video/f52x8rjtyuq71/player
