And again, we're not saying choosing 2 beats choosing 1, 2 wins against 1 or 9 wins against 10.

我们不是说选立场2会击败选立场1的,选立场2能赢立场1的,或者选立场9能赢选立场10的

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So, keep in mind that one milliwatt is just the same as saying 1 times 10 to the -3 joules per second.

所以，请记住1毫瓦,和1乘以10的-3次方焦耳每秒,的说法是等同的。

麻省理工公开课 - 化学原理课程节选

So what I'm saying is that du through path 1 plus du going through path 3.

于是1,因为能量。

麻省理工公开课 - 热力学与动力学课程节选

We're saying choosing 2 always does better than choosing 1, regardless of what the other person chooses.

我们说选立场2总是优于立场1,无论对手如何选择

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So it feels a little backward mentally perhaps, 1 but this is saying, "do this block of code as long as n is less than 1."

所以它感觉可能有点迟缓，但是它指明，“只要n小于,执行这段代码“

哈佛公开课 - 计算机科学课程节选

So this code is identical functionally nonswitch c to the last implementation we saw, nonswitch.c, but I'm just ever-more emphatically saying, "In case 1," that is when n equals 1 -- or when case 2 applies -- when n equals 2 or when n equals 3 do what?

所以这些代码到最后的实现上，功能是,完全相同的，但是我想要再次强调一下，“在case，1“，那是当n等于1时1,或者当case，2适用-,当n等于2或者当n等于3，它将做什么？

哈佛公开课 - 计算机科学课程节选