Ah, shame, they are a bit weak.
The first chapter of the New Testament.
www.reddit.com/r/artificial/comments/b38hbk/what_do_my_fellow_ai_researchers_think_of_ben/ What do my fellow AI researchers think of Ben Goertzel and his research?
Now that we've done one section manually, let's graduate and use the
readelf -S of the other sections: [Nr] Name Type Address Offset
Size EntSize Flags Link Info Align
[ 2] .text PROGBITS 0000000000000000 00000210
0000000000000027 0000000000000000 AX 0 0 16.text is executable but not writable: if we try to write to it Linux segfaults. Let's see if we really have some code there:objdump -d hello_world.ohello_world.o: file format elf64-x86-64
Disassembly of section .text:
0000000000000000 <_start>:
0: b8 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%eax
5: bf 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%edi
a: 48 be 00 00 00 00 00 movabs $0x0,%rsi
11: 00 00 00
14: ba 0d 00 00 00 mov $0xd,%edx
19: 0f 05 syscall
1b: b8 3c 00 00 00 mov $0x3c,%eax
20: bf 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%edi
25: 0f 05 syscallIf we grep
b8 01 00 00 on the hd, we see that this only occurs at 00000210, which is what the section says. And the Size is 27, which matches as well. So we must be talking about the right section.This looks like the right code: a
write followed by an exit.The most interesting part is line to pass the address of the string to the system call. Currently, the This modification is possible because of the data of the
a which does:movabs $0x0,%rsi0x0 is just a placeholder. After linking happens, it will be modified to contain:4000ba: 48 be d8 00 60 00 00 movabs $0x6000d8,%rsi.rela.text section.The most important example is perhaps and , both of which have the same Lie algebra, but are not isomorphic.
Has some of the best map data available for the United Kingdom, but their data appears to be proprietary?
Learned readers will ask themselves: so why use an unbalanced tree instead of balanced one, which offers better asymptotic times en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-balancing_binary_search_tree?
Likely:
- the maximum number of entries is small enough due to memory size limitations, that we won't waste too much memory with the root directory entry
- different entries would have different levels, and thus different access times
- tree rotations would likely make caching more complicated
Do you know what is worse than XML? Pseudo XML: stackoverflow.com/questions/5558502/is-html5-valid-xml/39560454#39560454
In the case of field however, we can expand the Lagrangian out further, to also integrate over the space coordinates and their derivatives.
Since we are now working with something that gets integrated over space to obtain the total action, much like density would be integrated over space to obtain a total mass, the name "Lagrangian density" is fitting.
E.g. for a 2-dimensional field :
Of course, if we were to write it like that all the time we would go mad, so we can just write a much more condensed vectorized version using the gradient with :
And in the context of special relativity, people condense that even further by adding to the spacetime Four-vector as well, so you don't even need to write that separate pesky .
The main point of talking about the Lagrangian density instead of a Lagrangian for fields is likely that it treats space and time in a more uniform way, which is a basic requirement of special relativity: we have to be able to mix them up somehow to do Lorentz transformations. Notably, this is a key ingredient in a/the formulation of quantum field theory.
There are unlisted articles, also show them or only show them.