MonDie

The saying might be related to the old myth about that gremlin-like thing that stands on your chest while you're paralyzed in your bed. It was their interpretation of their sleep-paralysis. They thought it could actually kill you if you didn't come out of it soon enough. EDIT: "might be related" as in "I see similarity between these ideas. Maybe someone should look for a connection."

EDIT: I just read on Wikipedia that there is no evidence that identifying a child's learning style will improve their learning. Is there a lot of research on the best ways for people to learn and retain information? I want to know about it. What's a good source? I'm looking at books, but I'm only finding books aimed at teachers.

Can anyone relate this to kombucha tea? I brew it in my home. I only have some knowledge of pro- and eukaryotic cell structure and processes. Maybe this book would help. I haven't read it yet, but it can be read for free off of this site. Many primates eat leaves and other fibrous material. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=9826#toc

I just ordered that book too. Fortunately, it's in hardcover, so I didn't opt to pay more to get it in better condition. Thank you both for the information. I'll see what I can learn over the summer. For now, I've got schoolwork to keep up with. I will think of responses to make in the future. I'll even write them into my reminders. I'm still not used to being called "sir" all the time. It ruined my fun.

"Tell me more" is not a question, it's a command. Now tell me more! I am commanding you to talk to me about computer science so I can listen to what you have to say!

I like you, but I don't know what you're trying to accomplish.

I don't know. Tell me more. I saw Khaled mention something called a "Turing machine" a while back.

I'll get these two, and I'll get Roger Young's book as a bonus in case I want an introduction to binary code. Nobody said it wasn't a good explanation, they just said it didn't teach them what they wanted to learn. The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer From First Principles Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ I didn't order that first book sooner because a prerequisite is a programming language, but the second book should take care of that while giving me an understanding of programming. Why have they not released a hard cover version of the latter book, it being so hefty? All three books add up to less than $60. All are brand new since there were no cheaper used copies. Is she right about what topics would be covered by a book on computing versus a book on computation?

What do you mean? I can still cancel the order if the book isn't right.

But there are some differences. I should have mentioned that I was talking about known differences in brain functioning. Was there a thread on those already? I suppose society thinks women are more emotional because it's said that they're more emotional during certain periods of hormonal activity. However, testosterone is associated with rage. That's why people get "roid rage." Perhaps society discourages emotion in men and therefore doesn't let them blame their hormones.

Xittenn, that does answer my question. thank you Is there any reason I shouldn't buy an older, early 2000's edition of Data Structures and Other Objects Using C++? I just found this cheap, little book. I didn't even pay shipping. How Computers Work: Processor And Main Memory by Roger Young It has mixed reviews, but I would like to know what this science is all about, so I think I'll like it. After I get it and read it, I'll post a review of it on here or on amazon, whichever is more appropriate. I can't believe that only now did I just notice I misspelled sicence. If any mods think this thread is worthy of appearance in the forum search, they can fix it.

Okay, that input computed into a simple computation. All those words and phrases were interpreted unambiguously by my language. Is it comparable to light refraction/reflection and the resulting image? This is what I mean: Light waves bouncing and eventually being interpreted as color is like computing, but the processes by which the light-waves bounced is like a computation. However, if no light shines on something, it is not part of the process (computation) even though it could have been if the lighting (input) was different. In other words, you could look at computings done by a system, but you would not be able to replicate the underlying system unless you understood the computations guiding the computings. If they're so related, why are there books on both subjects? Would a computing book involve doing the computing, and would a computation book involve setting up the rules to get a desired computation?

So the "soft act of thinking" is computing because thinking goes step by step, and the hardware remembers all the data from the individual steps, or the "hard processing of information" is the computing because a calendar stores information, and we do computations with that information by thinking about the information? So is computing a following of rules which guide the computation, whereas computation is the physical act ("work") done by computer hardware or brain cells?

I almost assumed that Khaled gave the negation and was identifying my questions as rhetorical questions intended to critically point out a non-existent contradiction in his posts, but I realized I was assuming the negation was given by him and not some random, mischievous user. I will reply in a moment.

Dictionary.com makes the terms seem synonymous. Maybe I need to see a textbook definition. I began tutoring, and I realized not only that I am supposed to have them refer to their textbook, indeed the textbooks usually explain things better than I would have anyway. I understand the first definition given, but what is meant by "fulfill organizational tasks?" Is inputing numbers into a set of functions an example of computing, and is the sum of the processes performed by all the functions an example of a computation? That seems wrong because we would refer to computers as "computators" instead.

Could this be related to computing? The other day, I came to understand some probability by using drawings similar to that bead toy. I realized why you are more likely to get a balanced ratio of heads to tails if you flip a coin more times, despite the independence of each flip. I developed a system for drawing out every possibility resulting in a particular ratio such as 4:4 (balanced) or 7:1 (imbalanced), and based on that system, I reasoned that there will be more possibilities which result in balanced ratios especially if you have a high number of coin flips.

Aren't these contradicting each other? On Wikipiedia, I read that computing includes systems which were in use before the invention of the computer. For example, the cover of that computing book displays a child with a beads toy used for counting. What about theoretical computation? Do the words "practical" and "theoretical" imply the difference between having the computer do it for you and making theoretical conjectures based on an understanding of what the computer is doing?

Of the books I looked at, this seemed to be the only cheap book on general computing with good reviews, but reviewers say it's "intermediate" level, and someone said a person should at least know one of a few specific languages before trying it. The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer From First Principles by Nisan and Schocken Even the books released in editions have the used copies of their previous editions selling for a lot. Well, except for some books generally called Computing Essentials (year), (Complete vs Introductory Edition) by O'Leary However, one edition got a horrendous review. Indeed, there is a new edition every year, and that reviewer claims that they constantly release new editions without updating the information, which he claims isn't even good information. However, I found a brief but positive review. The other reviews are just seller feedback misplaced in the book reviews section.

What is the difference between computing and computation? I'm looking at books.

I just found a good one for really cheap! I changed my mind and will not reveal the name yet.

Why do these differences in thinking develop, to what degree do the sexes differ, and can these differences (which are correlated with sex) be more strongly correlated with a sex-dependent trait?

The idea that it could be passed down through kin selection has some support from a study revealing that homosexual males tend to have more fecund female relatives. This is my own speculation, but if it's multiple genes working together, a male might have all the genes to make him homosexual, whereas his heterosexual brother might only have some of those genes. Nonetheless, his heterosexual brother would still be passing down genes which might result in homosexuality in future generations. Furthermore, they could be genes that only cause homosexuality under certain environmental conditions, which could be partially responsible for the aforementioned situations where people resort to having sexual relationships with the same sex. That would also bring kin selection into play. The Bonobo chimps are bisexual, and they're closely related to us.

My intention was to get some suggestions about resources to use, but discussion is good too. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot out there about primate diets. I've read some of Primate Behavioral Ecology by Strier, so I might contribute. Folivorous primates have to counteract the toxins in leaves, which they might do by eating other things. No, the colobus monkey eating burnt wood doesn't have Pica. The book says insects and leaves are high in amino acids. I eat seaweed, and I read that seaweeds have all essential amino acids. Maybe it was a misunderstanding of this webpage since I was only skimming the "Abstract" portion. http://www.sciencedi...308814606007655 Leaves are so plentiful, and might we benefit from making them edible? Other primates are already doing it.

I feel somewhat disengendered too, but I look very masculine. Sometimes my curious glances are misinterpreted as mean looks. People sometimes think I'm walking toward them angrily when I'm really just walking. I don't believe I could ever commit an act of passionate rage against anyone except one person in my life. Occasionally, I will wear clothes that are very bright and gender neutral, but they don't match as well with my current body as they would have with my innocent childhood body.

reads like a poem