I don't so much focus on specific topics as meander randomly through the topical landscape, like a broken adaptive model that doesn't realize downhill isn't supposed to be an option.
The bigger question: why is Nature wasting space even talking about a random useless tool?
The bigger question: why is Nature wasting space even talking about a random useless tool?
It's kind of like when you hear about a celebrity death and your first reaction is "Wait...they were still alive?"
It's kind of like when you hear about a celebrity death and your first reaction is "Wait...they were still alive?"
Large values of v indicate material presented very quickly or which is very boring. Careful empirical analysis has indicated that for large lectures, v is approximately 0.9c (where c is the speed of light). For departmental seminars is is ~0.75c and for conference presentations ~0.8c.
Large values of v indicate material presented very quickly or which is very boring. Careful empirical analysis has indicated that for large lectures, v is approximately 0.9c (where c is the speed of light). For departmental seminars is is ~0.75c and for conference presentations ~0.8c.
The length of a lecture according to your mind is dependent on the confusion-boringness factor, v. This represents the relative speed at which your brain can absorb the material versus the speed at which is presented, corrected by the level of boredom generated by the lecture style and material.
The length of a lecture according to your mind is dependent on the confusion-boringness factor, v. This represents the relative speed at which your brain can absorb the material versus the speed at which is presented, corrected by the level of boredom generated by the lecture style and material.