Probably every single person with knee problems.
Probably every single person with knee problems.
> binom.test(11,n=24, alternative = "two.sided")
Exact binomial test
data: 11 and 24
number of successes = 11, number of trials = 24, p-value = 0.8388
alternative hypothesis: true probability of success is not equal to 0.5
95 percent confidence interval:
0.2555302 0.6717919
sample estimates:
probability of success
0.4583333
Probably not. Or at least we can’t conclude that from the data. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I didn’t know that Rómendacil II was born with another name. Got the rest. :)
Logicians are mathematicians. Well, most of them are.
I have yet to meet a single logician, american or otherwise, who would use the definition without 0.
That said, it seems to depend on the field. I think I’ve had this discussion with a friend working in analysis.
Or more likely torus-earthers, unless the gluing is reversed.
Depends on the kind of blur. Some kinds can indeed be almost perfectly removed if you know the used blurring function, others are destructive. But, yes, don’t take that chance. Always delete/paint over sensitive information.
Source: we had to do just that in a course I took a long time ago.
It may have nothing to do with categorization, but has everything to do with categorification which is much more interresting anyway.
EVEN IN DEATH I SERVE THE
OMNISSIAHORNITHOLOGIST