On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 09:09:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Graaagh the
Mighty) wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 14:39:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David C.
>Ullrich) sat on a tribble, which squeaked:
>
[1]>>That's one scary thing - in fact there are places in
>>Windows95 where the
On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 21:12:40 -0700, Chas F Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"David C. Ullrich" wrote:
>>
[...]
>
>In the back-of-envelope calculations I did, this is really the key
>missing information. If heart attacks are evenly distributed through
On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 23:35:06 GMT, Tetsuo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tetsuo at
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 24-06-2001 00:17:
>
>> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David C. Ullrich at
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 23-06-2001 16:06:
>>
ups showed an increase."
>
>http://www.norml.org.nz/norml/Marijuana/Driving.htm#abc981014
Oh, so _that's_ where you're getting your facts. Well I think
that trying to bring actual _data_ into a discussion like this
is simply inappropriate.
I wonder if there's any dat
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 21:14:44 -0700, Chas F Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"David C. Ullrich" wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:23:03 +0100, Paul Jones
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >"David C. Ullrich"
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:23:03 +0100, Paul Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"David C. Ullrich" wrote:
>>
>> But analyzing it this way simply makes no sense. Those
>> "trials" you're talking about are _far_ from independent;
>> each &q
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:02:23 +0100, Paul Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"David C. Ullrich" wrote:
>>
>> >considerable benefit for neurogenic bladder problems,
>>
>> I did not know that, but I know that the topic is of considerable
>> inter
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:37:02 +0100, "Mr Unreliable"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>David C. Ullrich wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 15:22:25 +0100, Paul Jones
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>There was s
this is not actually homework you
need to explain the question much more accurately.
>Thanks and take care,
>Paul
>All About MS - the latest MS News and Views
>http://www.mult-sclerosis.org/
David C. Ullrich
*
"Som
egral of f(t) from 0 to 2pi is the same as the integral of
f(2t) from 0 to 2pi. (A simple change of variables shows that
the integral of f(2t) from 0 to pi = (int f(t), 0, 2pi)/2, and
similarly (int f(2t), pi, 2pi) = (int f(t), 0, 2pi)/2. Now apply the
fact that 1/2 + 1/2 = 1.)
>Francis
>
;--
>Francis Sweeney
>Dept. of Aero/Astro
>Stanford U.
David C. Ullrich
*
"Sometimes you can have access violations all the
time and the program still works." (Michael Caracena,
comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc 5/1/01)
=
11 matches
Mail list logo
