Now, I'm fully aware that this is not the flashiest example in physics, but I'm not worried about that right now.
我很清楚,这个并不是物理学中最经典的例子,但是这并是我现在的担心
But on the other hand, it's not a good city to... Well, I shouldn't say that.
但另一方面,马德里不是一个特别好的城市……嗯,我不该说这个的。
As long as it was not abrupt, right? I may take my scissors, and cut out a foot in the middle.
这个过程并不是突然的,对吗?,我拿出一把剪刀,这时减掉中间的一英尺。
But there's actually hidden in there an important element, and that is, when I create an instance, I have to be able to get access to the things that characterize that instance.
也就是,当我创建了一个实例,我应该能够获得那些特性化,这个实例的东西,我的意思不是说它们是想法,或者情绪之类的。
It is not an SI unit because it is not a multiple of 10 to the 3rd, but I like the angstrom.
它不是国际制单位,因为它不是,10的3次方进制,但我还是喜欢这个单位。
We're not a very big, important bank yet, but it makes me interested in the whole field.
我们不是很大很牛的投行,但这使我对这个领域非常非常感兴趣。
I did buy this at like a child store so it's not very robust here.
这个天平好像是我在儿童商店买的,似乎不是很结实。
But I meant something else, that's right, but I meant something else.
但是我指的不是这个,你说的没错,但是我想要别的答案
This is for people like me .
这个是给像我这样的,或者不是我这种。
That's not what I was looking for but that's part of the answer, so you're absolutely right. Yes?
我想说的不是这个,但这也是原因之一,你说的肯定是对的,请说
I suppose what I'm really saying is that the word "hermeneutics" wasn't available, and the idea that there ought to be a sort of a systematic study of how we interpret things wasn't really current.
我想说的是“诠释学“这个词,不是一开始就有的,而应该系统地学习,如何解释事物,这种思想也当时也是没有的。
The guys who are famous are the generals who get credit for putting together a nice formation when it's not the simple one I've just given you.
出名的是指挥官,他们是因为能排出精妙的阵型,而不是我摆的这个简单方阵而闻名的
I don't have to go read what it printed out in the screen. This has returned a value that I can use. Because I could do a test to say, is this a return value? If it's not, I'll do something else with it. So the binding is still there, it simply doesn't print it out.
我不想读到屏幕中打印出来的这行字,程序返回过一个我能够使用的值,因为我可以做个小测试,来说明这是否是返回的值,如果不是,我可以做一些其它的事,而这个绑定依然在这儿,没有打印任何东西。
The argument is not saying, "If something is possible, if I can imagine it, it's true."
这个论证并不是在说,如果某件事是可能的,如果我能想象它,那它就是真实的
Now, again, I'm not any kind of scientist and so I'm not in any position to say, "Look, here are the details of the explanation."
我不是什么科学家,所以我没有资格说,看,这个解释的细节就是这样
In many moods--at least,when I think about not the simple, the ordinary David Smith case with a single belief or two, but the full bodied--that's a bad term-- the full blown Napoleon case with all the memories,all the beliefs.
至少我想到的不是,这个简单的只拥有一两个信念的案例,而是完全的,不该这么说-,完整的拥有全部记忆和信念的拿破仑。
So it's not, as I say altogether straightforward to see how the answer " "Death is bad for me, because when I'm dead I don't exist" how that answers the problem as opposed to simply focusing our attention on the problem ? How can nonexistence be bad for me?
所以这并不是,就像我说的,那么简单可以领会到这个答案,“死亡对我来说不好,因为我死了我就不存在了“,如何回答了这个问题,和我们仅仅把关注点放在问题本身相反,不存在怎么可能对我来说有坏处呢?
But one of the things I want to stress is, this course is not about Python.
但是我想强调的一点是,这个课并不是关于Python语言的。
And it treats it as a string, it's simply getting me back 52*7 the value of that string, 52 times 7, rather than the value of it.
这让Python把它当做字符串来对待,他返回给我了,一个字符串的值,而不是这个数的和。
I think that,generally speaking -and Bob Shiller can speak to this with a lot more authority than I can this bubble was not something that should have surprised people.
我想,总的来说,希勒来讲这个话题,比我有权威的多,次贷泡沫,不是突然的
4 So this is 16 times 4 equals 64 and though this is not proof by any means, it's not a formal proof because here is one example that happens to prove my point.
所以是16*4,即,尽管如此,这并不是严格的证明,因为是这个例子碰巧证明了我的观点。
But I should say that the crucial point isn't for you to agree with me.
我要说的这个关键点,并不是要你们赞同我。
Because in doing that, Python would then have a value that it could pass on into some other part of a computation, and if it wasn't what I wanted, I might be a long ways downstream in the computation before I actually hit some result that makes no sense.
因为如果这样做的话,Python会将,输入的值传递到下面的,一些运算中去,如果这个值的类型不是我想要的,我可能会在得到,一个毫无意义的结果之前,经历一个很长时间的,计算过程。
And I think the example of the Evening Star and the Morning Star-- which is not at all original to me-- that this example shows, this counter example shows, that Descartes' original argument doesn't work either.
而且我认为晨星,和昏星的例子,这不是我原创的,这个例子说明,这个反例说明了,笛卡尔的原来的那个论证也行不通
So just to reinforce this, I could run gcc math2.c but I'm getting a little tired of this a.out convention and recall that there's this utility called "make" that right now doesn't really improve much, other than give it a better name.
所以我强调这点,我可以运行“gcc,math2,c“,但是我不是很喜欢a,out这个默认的名字,想取消它,那么这里有个叫做“make“的命令“,这个命令现在没有很大的改进,只是把用来更改名字用的。
I'm not asking Is this person stage Mr. X the same person stage as SK 2007.
我不是在问,这个阶段的X先生,和2007年的我是不是同一阶段。
应用推荐