"It was a good through ball by Clint and I was lucky enough to get on to it,"
VOA: standard.2009.06.24
Clearly, Milton is in some way wonderfully speaking through the Lady here. Then we get the Lady again: Shall I go on?Or have I said enough?
确实,弥尔顿在一些方面【笑】,让这位女士替他说话,让我们继续看这位女士:,我应该继续吗?还是我说的够多了?
But I've been there enough that I get a, I have a sense of what it's like there.
但我去那儿的次数够多了,所以我很清楚那儿是什么样子的。
Did I say that right? One of the misfortunes of scholarship, you have to live long enough to get your accolades.
我说的对吧,学术界的一大损失,你活得够长才能获得所应得的荣誉。
Well, I don't care for the speed but I can't get enough of that safety gear.
我不在乎速度,我就是对那些安全装置百看不厌。
My hope is that if I do it well enough, people who aren't philosophers and are interested exclusively in conceptual analysis will get something out of it.
我希望如果我做得足够好,可以让那些不是哲学家但是,对概念分析感兴趣的人,得到一些启发。
Let me imagine that I've been lucky enough to get you out of the way-- you're fighting him you can't even look at me, but I can do that.
假设我运气够好,把你从这条路上推开了,你在和他搏斗,不可能看得到我,但我可以这样
If I had money enough to raise a few hundred contrabands and arm them I'd get up an insurrection among the slaves; told the captain I'd desert to do it."
若我能供给他们军用品和武器的话,我会在奴隶中间掀起一场暴动,上尉知道,我会的"
The second question I want to ask is what's the base case? When do I get down to a problem that's small enough that it's basically trivial to solve? Here it was lists of size one. I could have stopped at lists of size two right. That's an easy comparison.
第二个问题是什么是基础条件?,我要将问题分解到何时才使得问题,小到可以解决的基本问题?,这里是当列表的长度为1有时候,我也可以在长度为2的时候停止分解,那是一个非常简单的对比。
Still, there are a couple of claims about death that get made frequently enough, about death being mysterious in one way or another, that I want--or special or unique-- that I want to focus on.
但仍然,还是经常出现各种,声称死亡在这种或是那种意义上,是神秘的,特别的,或者是独特的这样的说法-,引起了我的注意。
That means, when I take two derivatives, I want to get a, then you should know enough calculus to know it has to be something like at^, and half comes from taking two derivatives.
也就是说,当我想求二阶导时,得到了a,你应该有足够的微积分知识,才能知道必须有类似at^的项,而这个1/2则是因为求了两次导数
The only place q1 appears here is here, so when I differentiate again I'm going to get -2b and sure enough that's negative, which is what I wanted to know, just to check that when I'm finding this thing, I'm finding a maximum and not a minimum.
只有这一处有q1,因此二阶导数是-2b,它肯定是个负数了,这正是我们想得到的结果,这就验证了我们刚才得出的,是最大值而不是最小值
应用推荐