Algorithm Optimisation Championship. - page 30
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
There, Darwin got it too...
In general, the main argument of the opponents of Darwinism is that no intermediate forms of humans in the evolutionary chain (or animals in general) have been found, while they do not understand (or pretend not to understand) the discrete nature of individuals. DNA is a discrete record of information and simply does not inherently allow for "flow" without step from parents to heirs. Either a pure copy or another being different from the parent will result, and there is no third. But anti-Darwinists demand a step-less transition not only in the change of species, but also of individuals. It is the same here... One thing is denied and at the same time other very important details are omitted (or turned upside down).
Von and the GPS horror turns out to be able to do without Einstein. Just recently experimentally confirmed gravitational waves, which were theoretically justified by Einstein, will also be challenged in the near future, it seems, and Einstein will be completely forgotten.
He - "Multiple dimensions of space???".
They - "Didn't you know you live in a multidimensional world???".
Von and the GPS horror turns out to be able to do without Einstein. Just recently experimentally confirmed gravitational waves, which were theorised by Einstein, will also be challenged in the near future, it seems, and Einstein will be completely forgotten.
There, Darwin got it too...
In general, the main argument of the opponents of Darwinism is that no intermediate forms of humans in the evolutionary chain (or animals in general) have been found, while they do not understand (or pretend not to understand) the discrete nature of individuals. DNA is a discrete record of information and simply does not inherently allow for "flow" without step from parents to heirs. Either a pure copy or another being different from the parent will result, and there is no third. But anti-Darwinists demand a step-less transition not only in the change of species, but also of individuals. It's the same here... One thing is denied and at the same time other very important details are omitted (or turned upside down).
Von and the GPS horror turns out to be able to do without Einstein. Just recently experimentally confirmed gravitational waves, which were theoretically justified by Einstein, will also be challenged in the near future, it seems, and Einstein will be completely forgotten.
In general, the main argument of the opponents of Darwinism is that no intermediate forms of man in the evolutionary chain (or animals in general) have been found...
Why it has not been found. There are many tribes on different levels of development. Somewhere there is an island near India, there is even a Stone Age.
Andrew, pay attention to your logical fallacies: "I don't know it. I can only describe it and therefore investigate it.
If you do not know something, you can describe it only after you investigate, not before.
First explore multidimensional space (where there are more than three spatial dimensions), prove that it exists and then describe it.
Oops, mistake. The first was a word, and the word was 2 bytes :)
If you know that there is some phenomenon (a set of facts that doesn't fit into current knowledge), it effectively means that you know that something you don't know (otherwise if you don't even know that unexplained facts exist then there is nothing to worry about).
And so, if there is a set of unexplained facts, then in the beginning a hypothesis is built, the hypothesis produces a conceptual apparatus. Then on the basis of the new conceptual system the assumption is made about the existence of additional facts which are not described in the set of known facts. And then the experiments are performed (you call it research).
The experiments, respectively, either confirm or refute the hypothesis. After that the hypothesis passes into the category of theories and they try to disprove it in every possible way. If the scientific community for many years and failed to disprove the theory, it passes into the category of proven knowledge and from this point you can say: I know something.
Why isn't it found. There are many tribes at different levels of development. There is an island somewhere out there near India, it's even Stone Age still.
At present, there is only one species of Homo sapiens. All tribes, even the densest ones, belong to this one species, even if their society is at the level of the Stone Age. It is proved that people in tribes do not differ in intellect from people living in developed countries and if we take a child from a tribe and bring him up in a developed society, his intellect will not differ from "usual" people....
I was actually defending Darwin, if anything...
...
There's Einstein and Darwin being pelted with tomatoes, and you're showing Kaku... :)
He's a smart guy, though. But his String Theory has more flaws and shortcomings than Penrose's Ion Theory ....
Did you know that you have discovered new elements in the Mendeleev table that no one has ever seen before?
Why go far and imagine the unimaginable?
A simple practical championship goal:
We take a neural network (any network) with 500 neuron weights (these are our input parameters of fitness function, we can consider them as 500 measurements), we feed no matter what to the network input, at the output we get the Recovery Factor (RF) of the EA's work for a certain period of time. It doesn't matter whether it will work in the future or not, the main thing is to have an algorithm that can find the maximum value of FF, i.e. trading profitability.