Talk:Geyer
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Some content, largely from de:Geyer. Enough to remove the stub label? Captndelta (talk) 10:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Please add a link here to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florian_Geyer 212.181.158.116 (talk) 22:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Geyer, Frank P., Interesting enough. But who was Perry?
There was a deadly fire at Frank's home here in the states. What to do, I'm not in law enforcement. Callowhill Street is only less than 2 miles from noir's (subject) home. I know where Frank lived in Philadelphia. You would be surprised where Detective Frank handled himself after the fire. What Frank did is determinable and convergent.
I myself do not believe the suspects started the fire, but they certainly knew where Frank lived. The two were smart men. I shall not say more about two main suspects, or, as they are more accurately called, prisoners. Nothing utopian about this. Flawed tables, I don't need 'em. That the two smart men did not start the fire is my good estimation. The arson was started by an unknown assailant stranger other than that of Holmes or Pitezel, one obviously mentioned in Sprogel's Philadelphia Police: Past and Present, bio on Detective Geyer. But I will piece together only what happened (arson related since Frank's home of 15 years in Philadelphia burned down after it was completely paid, which is only too true) to Frank's home to my best of my ability. This makes sense. Then we can make better sense of Battle of Hastings. So far I read Prince or King Edward's letter he had received from another royalty who sent it to him. I read it several times ago when I first heard of this historical piece and was delighted to come across such a thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAMMERGRIFFIN (talk • contribs) 03:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Computers Which Writes What It Reads Part 02
editSimply input a document into a computer. I was working at figuring out how to get our computer to write what is input in front of you into it. It really works, but then, so does a third rail.
A railway could need less than 2% gradient to make it safe. Getting the computer to understand what is input is quite possible. The key is getting the computer to do all your writing for you, for example.
The rate of change formula is more easily read in this manner. I do not care to refer to it as a derivative. A 2% gradient from my angle certainly relies on using less than 26 elements, exactly, and converges towards less than 2% when 10 more items add in. 26 + 10 = 36 items or elements. So, using just one element from my little example here, 1/36 = just more than 3%. Exactly 41 elements minimum are needed to start a gradient at 2.4%. Essential, deltad expressed as (x1 + h2) - h3, without a divisor. With a divisor, one simply gets rid of the negative sign. The key relies on what to do when x1 is greater than h2. You divide here and get x approaching 0 instead of 1. When x1 is great than h2, you subtract here and just get a sign of = or +. Greater than 41 elements converge towards less than 2%.
The result. You will have two tables, one with percentages and the other with whole numbers. Easy enough, I try not to combine the two tables when I'm working. My figuring, at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAMMERGRIFFIN (talk • contribs) 12:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)