Trump 2nd term prediction thread
So, looks like Trump not only smashed the electoral college, but is looking on track to win the popular vote, which seems to be an unexpected turn of events, but a clear sign of the current temperature in the country and perhaps the wider world.
Would be interested to hear views on how his 2nd term will pan out from both sides of the aisle - major happenings, what he's going to get done, what he's not going to get done, the impact of his election on the current conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, whether his popularity will remain the same, wane, or increase, etc.
A bit of an anemic OP, I know, just interested to hear people's thoughts now that the election uncertainty is over.
Very different times.
Kate had a relationship with her English teacher while she was at school. Nowadays he’d be struck off and possibly worse, deservedly so.
Very very different
One day we learned one of the 16 year olds had died in a motorbike accident. Turned out it was a present from the teacher he was having an 'affair' with. Then we learned that teacher had been abusing younger kids. Her got another job! Got caught again. Then he committed suicide.
Very very different
One day we learned one of the 16 year olds had died in a motorbike accident. Turned out it was a present from the teacher he was having an 'affair' with. Then we learned that teacher had been abusing younger kids. Her got another job! Got caught again. Then he committed suicide.
I’m going to go all private eye on this and ask how the parents thought their 16 yo son became the proud owner of a motorbike.
No idea. I dont even know if they knew.
Boarding school?
The great thing about the way we did modern maths at primary school was we could go at our own pace on most of it.
for some treason I'm thinking Flecther book 13 but it was a very long time ago. I still recall completing the square being an 'ooo that's neat' moment
I'm sure you could relearn it very quickly. It's not as difficult as d2 finds it.
Ok, since that was so easy, show that the sum of odd numbers 1 to 2n-1 is n squared.
Btw, this is pretty basic. I'm pretty sure completing the square is "harder" in some sense.
We define the people who are more likely to and have a track record of making better decisions as "intelligent". Like I said - definitions are not right or wrong, but they can be useful.
The conversation is mostly meaningless, and more to the point, we had literally this conversation in the, wait for it, "IQ" thread not so long ago. Don't worry, you're not the only person out there who would prefer to deny that IQ is a real, meaningful measure of anything. In fact, the only reason that certified
Wait a sec we had this conversation also on the topic of voters IQ and even you guys had to belatedly admit it wasn't obvious at all trump voters median IQ was lower than Harris voters median IQ.
Wait a sec we had this conversation also on the topic of voters IQ and even you guys had to belatedly admit it wasn't obvious at all trump voters median IQ was lower than Harris voters median IQ.
I don't recall conceding that, but if so, then that would be the point at which IQ stops being useful.
Ok, since that was so easy, show that the sum of odd numbers 1 to 2n-1 is n squared.
Btw, this is pretty basic. I'm pretty sure completing the square is "harder" in some sense.
Im not gauss
I agree completeing the square is harder in some sense. But it followed on natually from the maths we were doing.
Wait a sec we had this conversation also on the topic of voters IQ and even you guys had to belatedly admit it wasn't obvious at all trump voters median IQ was lower than Harris voters median IQ.
You’re making the mistake of assuming that when people vote they do it by making conscious rational decisions rather than a mix of things that especially include emotional responses and familial influences.
Im not gauss
I agree completeing the square is harder in some sense. But it followed on natually from the maths we were doing.
The reason I even mentioned it, is I think I learnt completing the square for GCSE, so would have been some time 14-16, but didn't learn about arithmetic progressions/series till P1 of A level. So it's easier, but was further along in the curriculum IIRC. And not even part of the base curriculum, you would have had to choose A level maths.
We did modern maths at primary school and it was superb (well i thought so and I hated school). We did bases, matrices, truth tables etc
and there was a place we worked through books (fletcher iirc) with loads of arithmetic and then algebra problems that progressed. A few of us were many books ahead of the rest.
By the time of O level curriculam I was far more into getting pissed
We did modern maths at primary school and it was superb (well i thought so and I hated school). We did bases, matrices, truth tables etc
and there was a place we worked through books (fletcher iirc) with loads of arithmetic and then algebra problems that progressed. A few of us were many books ahead of the rest.
By the time of O level curriculam I was far more into getting pissed
You learnt matrices at primary school? I think what happened might have been that you got pissed enough when you did O levels to imagine that you did matrices at primary school. And even then, the only matrices you did was solving simultaneous equations, so chill out on the matrix stuff.
Also, lol O levels. Even I'm not that old. GCSEs bruh. ****ing hell, Rodney had an O level.
Yes we did matrices. Rotation, translation and enlargment
Call me a skeptic. Your teacher might have shown you a rectangle and explained the 3 transforms ("scale", by the way, not "enlargement", unless he forgot to show you "enlittlement"), but I don't really see how this equates to "doing matrices".
They were called enlargement in those days. Some grappled with the concept of an enlargement matrix that could make the object smaller whcioh is why i guess tehy dumbed it down.
It's fun stuff on graph paper and just the sort of thing kids are happy to do. Bases involved blocks
They were called enlargement in those days. Some grappled with the concept of an enlargement matrix that could make the object smaller whcioh is why i guess tehy dumbed it down.
It's fun stuff on graph paper and just the sort of thing kids are happy to do. Bases involved blocks
Ok, so you should be a geometry buff. What's the perimeter of an ellipse?
If that one is too hard, assume the foci coincide.
I've captivated a pub audience with my matrices prowess if that helps you.
I wouldn't ever call myself a geometry buff.
