Bikie leadership test as feuding brothers taking up arms ...
www.news.com.au/...test...taking.../story-fncynjr2-1226513302082Nov 9, 2012 - THE self-proclaimed head of the Comanchero bikie gang Mark Buddle ... plays last year to take over a number of bars in Kings Cross but failed.
Wednesday, 6 May 2015
Was Sammy sweet aka Mark Buddle? Comancheros
Golden Dawn links to Dawood Ibrahim
Greek Golden Dawn trial opens without main accused | Zee ...
zeenews.india.com › World NewsApr 20, 2015 - The trial of 69 members of the Greek neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn, ... Govt clueless about Dawood Ibrahim's whereabouts: Home Ministry.
Golden Dawn still active- coming from Pakistan
GOLDEN DAWN LEAFLETS FOUND IN THE POSSESSION ...
https://icantrelaxingreece.wordpress.com/.../golden-dawn-leaflets-found-i...Jan 19, 2013 - THEY STABBED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLOCKING THEIR WAY The two men arrested for the murder of the young immigrant from Pakistan ...
Big Banks fail to pass on RBA Rate cut- alleged corruption
The corruption level within the alleged banks is huge. Where overseas in USA and further they are exposing BNP Paribas, JP Morgan Chase, and allegedly National Nominees Ltd, I have asked the banks about fraud, the police have told me it is an inside job and the bank is silent, yet forecloses because the letter of the law allows them to allegedly take your money for the underworld. My blog exposes http://juanitanewspapernow.blogspot.com.au/ When we start to see the alleged corruption linking to Rothschild name and Banking fraud then we need to audit the banks as they create loans for the income. Without the income they die.
Empire State Building - Triva
Triva-
A B-52 Bomber crashed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building on July 28, 1945 and the building didn't collapse?
A B-52 Bomber crashed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building on July 28, 1945 and the building didn't collapse?
John F. Kennedy- Triva
Trivia John F. Kennedy, whilst he was President his salary of $150,000 was donated to charities, even before from his time on the Legislative Assembly his salary again was donated to charities.
Tuesday, 5 May 2015
Proof Methods
Proof Methods:
Proof by vigorous handwaving:
Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
Proof by forward reference:
Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often not as forthcoming as at first.
Proof by funding:
How could three different government agencies be wrong?
Proof by example:
The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it contains most of the ideas of the general proof.
Proof by omission:
"The reader may easily supply the details" or "The other 253 cases are analogous"
Proof by deferral:
"We'll prove this later in the course".
Proof by picture:
A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by omission.
Proof by intimidation:
"Trivial."
Proof by adverb:
"As is quite clear, the elementary aforementioned statement is obviously valid."
Proof by seduction:
"Convince yourself that this is true!"
Proof by cumbersome notation:
Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.
Proof by exhaustion:
An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
Proof by obfuscation:
A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless syntactically related statements.
Proof by wishful citation:
The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem from the literature to support his claims.
Proof by eminent authority:
"I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-complete."
Proof by personal communication:
"Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete [Karp, personal communication]."
<>Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
"To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem."
Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.
Proof by importance:
A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.
Proof by accumulated evidence:
Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
Proof by cosmology:
The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.
Proof by mutual reference:
In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.
Proof by metaproof:
A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.
Proof by vehement assertion:
It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.
Proof by ghost reference:
Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.
Proof by semantic shift:
Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.
Proof by appeal to intuition:
Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.
Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
Proof by forward reference:
Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often not as forthcoming as at first.
Proof by funding:
How could three different government agencies be wrong?
Proof by example:
The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it contains most of the ideas of the general proof.
Proof by omission:
"The reader may easily supply the details" or "The other 253 cases are analogous"
Proof by deferral:
"We'll prove this later in the course".
Proof by picture:
A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by omission.
Proof by intimidation:
"Trivial."
Proof by adverb:
"As is quite clear, the elementary aforementioned statement is obviously valid."
Proof by seduction:
"Convince yourself that this is true!"
Proof by cumbersome notation:
Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.
Proof by exhaustion:
An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
Proof by obfuscation:
A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless syntactically related statements.
Proof by wishful citation:
The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem from the literature to support his claims.
Proof by eminent authority:
"I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-complete."
Proof by personal communication:
"Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete [Karp, personal communication]."
<>Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
"To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem."
Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.
Proof by importance:
A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.
Proof by accumulated evidence:
Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
Proof by cosmology:
The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.
Proof by mutual reference:
In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.
Proof by metaproof:
A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.
Proof by vehement assertion:
It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.
Proof by ghost reference:
Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.
Proof by semantic shift:
Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.
Proof by appeal to intuition:
Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)