- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Path integrals on BBC2
Collapse
X
-
-
He's got enough to be justifiably smug about!Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
Not just me either!Originally posted by Troll View PostSo it's not just me that finds him irritating!Behold the warranty -- the bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.Comment
-
I don't care who delivers the content as long as the science isn't patronising and aimed at children. Cox I'm indifferent about, the only time I got stay up late as a child was when the Sky at Night was on and learned a lot about astronomy from Patrick and his books which I could get from the library. So I ended up doing astronomy at uni but got sidetracked into IT.
Anything that might get kids interested in science / maths is valid but the beeb have lost the plot along with other program makers who seem to assume that the raw subject is too difficult for most to understand and so dumb down the subject and in some instances turn it into short soundbites. Does this lead to contributing to a short attention span of the audience? I think so but it's anecdotal at best and I can't quantify that.
The culture of x For Dummies doesn't help either, fully embrace a subject and explore or forever be bound by the summaries of wiki and Google searches.Comment
-
I couldn't agree more old chap! I can barely watch ancient history programmes anymore without getting into a tizz.Originally posted by Cliphead View PostI don't care who delivers the content as long as the science isn't patronising and aimed at children. Cox I'm indifferent about, the only time I got stay up late as a child was when the Sky at Night was on and learned a lot about astronomy from Patrick and his books which I could get from the library. So I ended up doing astronomy at uni but got sidetracked into IT.
Anything that might get kids interested in science / maths is valid but the beeb have lost the plot along with other program makers who seem to assume that the raw subject is too difficult for most to understand and so dumb down the subject and in some instances turn it into short soundbites. Does this lead to contributing to a short attention span of the audience? I think so but it's anecdotal at best and I can't quantify that.
The culture of x For Dummies doesn't help either, fully embrace a subject and explore or forever be bound by the summaries of wiki and Google searches.But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition. Pliny the youngerComment
-
Much as I love history programs I prefer to read what would be uni course content. I have an interest in Roman history (who doesn't), I did latin at school and that got me interested.Originally posted by Gibbon View PostI couldn't agree more old chap! I can barely watch ancient history programmes anymore without getting into a tizz.
More recently I read Prof Mary Beard's Pompeii and still correspond with her about questions I have about that particular time and a very knowledgeable lady she is and I'm grateful that she takes the time to answer my questions. What do we get on TV? A 'dramatised' version based on froth (not the BBC program the book was based on).
I prefer to read Pliny although already translated as I can't do that.Comment
-
This could be my walk home depending the consumption of beer. The planked constant?Originally posted by cojak View Post

Comment
-
He didn't explain that bit. He went from saying not all electrons can be at the same energy level in an atom (and gave the analogy of the audience not all being able to sit in the front row), to all electrons in the universe can't be at the same energy level therefore they magically communicate.Originally posted by Normie View PostI couldn't get my head around the bit where he said that no 2 electrons in the universe can have exactly the same energy level (Pauli Exclusion Principle). He said that if he warmed up the diamond he was holding, therefore changing the energy of the electrons in it, then this led to instantaneous changes in all electron energy levels in all atoms in the universe. WTF??? Or did I misunderstand that wrong?
Will work inside IR35. Or for food.Comment
-
There's some complex weave theory in there too.
Not to mention a bit of Hennessy uncertaintyLast edited by Sysman; 5 February 2013, 10:52.Behold the warranty -- the bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.Comment
-
And what about that infinite number of parallel universes?Originally posted by VectraMan View PostHe didn't explain that bit. He went from saying not all electrons can be at the same energy level in an atom (and gave the analogy of the audience not all being able to sit in the front row), to all electrons in the universe can't be at the same energy level therefore they magically communicate.
Or is that a different theory?Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers


Comment