[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.lisp

Re: Question about a numerical computation

William James

8/21/2015 11:02:00 AM

Paul Foley wrote:

> Forget epsilon; just look to see whether tmp changed at all. When you
> run out of bits, it won't change:
>
> (defun heron-sqrt (x)
> (let ((val 1l0))
> (loop
> (let ((next (* 0.5l0 (+ val (/ x val)))))
> (if (= next val)
> (return val)
> (setq val next))))))

Gauche Scheme:

(define (heron-sqrt x)
(let go ((val 1.0))
(let1 next (* 0.5 (+ val (/ x val)))
(if (= next val)
val
(go next)))))

(map heron-sqrt '(2 3 999888 10e10))
===>
(1.414213562373095 1.7320508075688772 999.9439984319122 316227.7660168379)

--
The Authoritarian Personality extends beyond the attempt to pathologize
cohesive gentile groups to pathologizing adaptive gentile behavior in general.
The principal intellectual difficulty is that behavior that is critical to
Judaism as a successful group evolutionary strategy is conceptualized as
pathological in gentiles. --- Dr. Kevin MacDonald; "The Frankfurt School of
Social Research and the Pathologization of Gentile Group Allegiances"
4 Answers

Mitchell Holman

1/1/2013 6:58:00 PM

0

Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in
news:im06e8he2gt7nu247u9o2cmc1vo2095lhq@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 09:36:55 -0600, Don Kresch
> <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:42:15 -0700, Desertphile
>><Desertphile@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>>
>>>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 16:58:45 -0600, Don Kresch
>>><spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:34:19 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 17:28:15 -0600, Don Kresch
>>>> > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:09:42 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> > > <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:00 -0600, Don Kresch
>>>> > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:14:31 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> > > > > <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 20:11:21 -0600, Don Kresch
>>>> > > > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:23:42 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> > > > > > > <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0600, Don Kresch
>>>> > > > > > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 10:56:35 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> > > > > > > > > <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>>>> > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:17:34 -0600, Don Kresch
>>>> > > > > > > > > ><spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:38:16 -0700, Desertphile
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>>>> > > > > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:18:12 GMT,
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >reports@scientology.org (Fred^72)
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@sbcglobal.net>
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >On Dec 25, 9:22=A0pm, Desertphile
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> ><Desertph...@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 03:51:47 GMT,
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3...
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >>>ow
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >>> Oh my sweet baby-fucked Jesus no! Global
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >>> warming has been proven to be a
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >>> scam!!!11 Save us, Ron Paul! Save us!
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> Cultists are still claiming "the"
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> so-called "hockey stick" is not
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> valid, even after almost two dozen
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> independant reproductions using
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> different methodologies and different
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> data.
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >Are you saying there are twenty variations
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> >of, "Mike's Nature trick?"
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >There are several ways to perform the
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >calculations: Mike's _Nature_
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >trick is only one---- obviously.
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> Are you saying you don't know what a "trick"
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> is in the context used
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >> by scientists?
>>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> >He does know: he is just insisting he does not.
>>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> it's not so much the trick as the HIDE THE
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> DECLINE part.
>>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >The _Nature_ trick explained why the declining
>>>> > > > > > > > > >confidence should be "hidden."
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > No, it didn't.
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > Yes, it did. Read it yourself:
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_htm...
>>>> > > > > > > > rticles/mbh98.pdf
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > > It was deliberate falsification of data.
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > > No.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Yes it was, cultist.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > No. Read the paper itself, Shit-for-brains.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > I have, cultist.
>>>> > > >
>>>>>>(whining snipped)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look, cultist: you haven't one shred of real evidence for
>>>>>> your
>>>>>>silly claim that humans are causing climate change. All you
>>>>>>cultists have is double-adding of temperature data, heat islands
>>>>>>from where the stations are placed, and other shenanigans to rival
>>>>>>what creationists do. You cultists are dishonest to the core.
>>>>>
>>>>>Huh? I am not a member of your cult,
>>>>
>>>> Look cultist: your cult has made up bullshit that humans are
>>>>causing "climate change".
>>>
>>>(whining snipped)
>>
>> Silly cultist. When faced with the fact that members of your
>>cult deliberately falsified data, you whine. Sucks to be you, cultist.
>
> The allegation that the data was falsified has been disproven. You
> need to stop making excuses for thieves like the Koch brothers.
>


All scientific data that proves conservatives
wrong is "falsified", "open to dispute", "from a
biased source", "needs further research or is
"out of date".

If it worked for Big Tobacco they will use it
anywhere.............

Desertphile

1/1/2013 7:38:00 PM

0

On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 09:36:55 -0600, Don Kresch
<spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:42:15 -0700, Desertphile <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 16:58:45 -0600, Don Kresch
> > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:34:19 -0700, Desertphile <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 17:28:15 -0600, Don Kresch
> > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:09:42 -0700, Desertphile <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:00 -0600, Don Kresch
> > > > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:14:31 -0700, Desertphile <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 20:11:21 -0600, Don Kresch
> > > > > > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:23:42 -0700, Desertphile <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0600, Don Kresch
> > > > > > > > > > <spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 10:56:35 -0700, Desertphile
> > > > > > > > > > > <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:17:34 -0600, Don Kresch
> > > > > > > > > > > ><spamcatch@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:38:16 -0700, Desertphile
> > > > > > > > > > > >> <Desertphile@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:18:12 GMT, reports@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >On Dec 25, 9:22=A0pm, Desertphile <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 03:51:47 GMT, repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DQ...
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >>> Oh my sweet baby-fucked Jesus no! Global warming has been proven to be a
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >>> scam!!!11 Save us, Ron Paul! Save us!
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> Cultists are still claiming "the" so-called "hockey stick" is not
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> valid, even after almost two dozen independant reproductions using
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> different methodologies and different data.
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >Are you saying there are twenty variations of, "Mike's Nature trick?"
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >There are several ways to perform the calculations: Mike's _Nature_
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >trick is only one---- obviously.
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Are you saying you don't know what a "trick" is in the context used
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> by scientists?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >He does know: he is just insisting he does not.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> it's not so much the trick as the HIDE THE DECLINE part.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >The _Nature_ trick explained why the declining confidence should be
> > > > > > > > > > > >"hidden."
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > No, it didn't.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Yes, it did. Read it yourself:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It was deliberate falsification of data.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes it was, cultist.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No. Read the paper itself, Shit-for-brains.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have cultist.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You have cultist, yet you still insist there was some kind of
> > > > > > falsehood in the paper---- and yet you still cannot state what it is,
> > > > > > nor where. See why you cultists are not taken seriously?
> > > >
> > > > > Look, cultist: you haven't one shred of real evidence for your
> > > >
> > > > Huh? I am not a member of your cult, Shit-for-brains.
> > > >
> > > > What, specifically, is wrong in MBH98? Skeptics have been asking you
> > > > stupid cultists that for years, and you still haven't answered. Why?
> >
> > > Look cultist: your cult has made up bullshit that humans are
> > > causing "climate change".
> >
> > Hey cult shittard! > > What, specifically, is wrong in MBH98? Skeptics
> > have been asking you stupid cultists that for years, and you still
> > haven't answered. Why?

> silly cultist. When faced with the fact that members of your
> cult deliberately falsified data, you whine. Sucks to be you, cultist.

Hey cult shittard! What, specifically, is wrong in MBH98? Skeptics
have been asking you stupid cultists that for years, and you still
haven't answered. Why?


--
Nemo me impune lacessit.
"He might say he's a comedian but deep down he knows [Desertphile] is a
very seriously deranged individual." --- Alarmist "falcon"

harry k

1/2/2013 5:44:00 AM

0

On Dec 28 2012, 9:52 pm, Olrik <olrik...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Le 2012-12-28 21:11, Don Kresch a écrit :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:23:42 -0700, Desertphile
> > <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>
> >> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0600, Don Kresch
> >> <spamca...@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>
> >>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 10:56:35 -0700, Desertphile
> >>> <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>
> >>>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:17:34 -0600, Don Kresch
> >>>> <spamca...@spamcatch.org> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:38:16 -0700, Desertphile
> >>>>> <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
>
> >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:18:12 GMT, repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 9:22=A0pm, Desertphile <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 03:51:47 GMT, repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> >>>>>>>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DQ...
> >>>>>>>>>> Oh my sweet baby-fucked Jesus no! Global warming has been proven to be a
> >>>>>>>>>> scam!!!11 Save us, Ron Paul! Save us!
> >>>>>>>>> Cultists are still claiming "the" so-called "hockey stick" is not
> >>>>>>>>> valid, even after almost two dozen independant reproductions using
> >>>>>>>>> different methodologies and different data.
>
> >>>>>>>> Are you saying there are twenty variations of, "Mike's Nature trick?"
>
> >>>>>> There are several ways to perform the calculations: Mike's _Nature_
> >>>>>> trick is only one---- obviously.
>
> >>>>>>> Are you saying you don't know what a "trick" is in the context used
> >>>>>>> by scientists?
>
> >>>>>> He does know: he is just insisting he does not.
>
> >>>>> it's not so much the trick as the HIDE THE DECLINE part.
>
> >>>> The _Nature_ trick explained why the declining confidence should be
> >>>> "hidden."
>
> >>> No, it didn't.
>
> >> Yes, it did.
>
> >    No, it didn't, cultist.
>
> >>> It was deliberate falsification of data.
>
> >> No.
>
> >    Yes it was, cultist.
>
> And so there goes what was once a fair mind. «Kresch» surrendered to
> dogmatic and ideological entities.
>
> Will he ever come back from the brain dead ghouls who snatch his reason?

How skeptics view the warming data. They ignore the fact that every
time the pick a new "decline" they start further up the slope.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a292/turnkey4099/SkepticsvReali...

Harry K

Desertphile

1/2/2013 6:32:00 PM

0

On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 21:44:26 -0800 (PST), harry k <turnkey@q.com>
wrote:

> On Dec 28 2012, 9:52?pm, Olrik <olrik...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Le 2012-12-28 21:11, Don Kresch a ?crit :
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:23:42 -0700, Desertphile
> > > <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
> >
> > >> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0600, Don Kresch
> > >> <spamca...@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> >
> > >>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 10:56:35 -0700, Desertphile
> > >>> <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
> >
> > >>>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:17:34 -0600, Don Kresch
> > >>>> <spamca...@spamcatch.org> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:38:16 -0700, Desertphile
> > >>>>> <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> scrawled in blood:
> >
> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:18:12 GMT, repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>>> Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 9:22=A0pm, Desertphile <Desertph...@spammegmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 03:51:47 GMT, repo...@scientology.org (Fred^72)
> > >>>>>>>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DQ...
> > >>>>>>>>>> Oh my sweet baby-fucked Jesus no! Global warming has been proven to be a
> > >>>>>>>>>> scam!!!11 Save us, Ron Paul! Save us!
> > >>>>>>>>> Cultists are still claiming "the" so-called "hockey stick" is not
> > >>>>>>>>> valid, even after almost two dozen independant reproductions using
> > >>>>>>>>> different methodologies and different data.
> >
> > >>>>>>>> Are you saying there are twenty variations of, "Mike's Nature trick?"
> >
> > >>>>>> There are several ways to perform the calculations: Mike's _Nature_
> > >>>>>> trick is only one---- obviously.
> >
> > >>>>>>> Are you saying you don't know what a "trick" is in the context used
> > >>>>>>> by scientists?
> >
> > >>>>>> He does know: he is just insisting he does not.
> >
> > >>>>> it's not so much the trick as the HIDE THE DECLINE part.
> >
> > >>>> The _Nature_ trick explained why the declining confidence should be
> > >>>> "hidden."
> >
> > >>> No, it didn't.
> >
> > >> Yes, it did.
> >
> > > ? ?No, it didn't, cultist.
> >
> > >>> It was deliberate falsification of data.
> >
> > >> No.
> >
> > > ? ?Yes it was, cultist.
> >
> > And so there goes what was once a fair mind. ?Kresch? surrendered to
> > dogmatic and ideological entities.
> >
> > Will he ever come back from the brain dead ghouls who snatch his reason?

> How skeptics view the warming data. They ignore the fact that every
> time the pick a new "decline" they start further up the slope.
>
> http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a292/turnkey4099/SkepticsvReali...

Huh? *NO!* I am a skeptic, and I have been a skeptic for 28 years. I
am a founding member of The Bay Area Skeptics; I have been a member of
The Skeptics Society for nearly that long; I have attended scores of
skeptics meetings and conferences. SKEPTICS DO NOT REJECT THE EVIDENCE
FOR HUMAN-CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE: we accept the evidence.

It appears you mean "Denialists," not "skeptics."

> Harry K


--
Nemo me impune lacessit.
"If Rod Serling were still alive, he could do an
entire Twilight Zone episode on you." -- erschroedinger