But we've just introduced it, so let's go back to the class notes and explain why this is the correct answer.
但是由于我们刚刚开始介绍它,因此让我们回到课堂讲义来解释一下,为什么这个是正确答案。
These are stupid questions, because once you understand what they're asking, the answer is just built in. It follows trivially.
这是些很愚蠢的问题,因为一旦你明白了他们的问题,答案就在其中,一切简单明了
And this puzzle piece here colored in blue because it's a Boolean expression is just something that--whose answer is either a yes or no, 0 true or false, one or zero.
这个拼图染成蓝色,因为它是布尔表达式,它的结果只可能是肯定或否定,对或错,1或者。
So if you demonstrate something by writing an intelligent answer just by outlining it and saying, well, what I would do is I would equate the energy lambda and then solve for lambda, I can see that you know what is going on.
如果你想证明一些东西,通过写下一些很天才的答案,仅仅大致说一下,好的,我想做的是能量相等,然后解出,我能看到你知道怎么做。
I was hoping for a simpler answer, which is, just run it. Which is, yeah I know, seems like a dumb thing to say, right?
我希望一个简单点儿的答案,比如说去运行它吧,这方法看起来挺笨的对不对?
Let's try to do part of it in the head, so I can just write down the answer.
让我们先试试前面的一部分,我就直接写答案了
It'd still give me an answer. It just would not be the answer I'm looking for.
然后运行程序,程序还是会返回一个答案,只是不是我想要的答案。
If I left it as just 9, odds are I would very often get what answer?
如果我使它保持是9,我可能得到,哪个答案?
Does it give you the answer that you expected it to give? Often, in practical problems, you'll spend just as much time doing performance debugging. Why is it slow?
它返回了期待中的结果了么?通常,在实际的问题中你会花,同样多的时间在性能调试上,它为什么运行这么慢?
So maybe Plato just thought it wasn't a good answer to Cebes' objection.
或者柏拉图只是觉得这对,赛贝斯反对观点回答得不好。
But the question is, is this the most general answer, or is it just one answer, and I think you all know that this is not the most general answer.
但问题在于,这是不是通解,或者说这是否只是一个特解,我想你们都知道,它不是通解
应用推荐