joelthelion

This is both true and a bit dumb. We are all responsible for these emissions by buying and burning these fuels (most of the time indirectly).

Merci, je comprends beaucoup mieux ton point de vue. Pour moi qui ne suis ces sujets que de très loin, Manon Garcia c'était nouveau 😊

I wouldn't be surprised if Trump threatened military action in return, should Canada go forward with it. I mean, it sounds crazy to write it, but is it really too crazy for Trump?

En même temps c'est son métier, je vois pas bien pourquoi on le lui reprocherait.

Le titre est un peu putaclic, mais je trouve qu'il y a pas mal d'idées intéressantes dans cette interview.

Dans de très nombreux pays, les films ne sont jamais doublés. Les gens n'ont pas l'air plus malheureux, et le niveau d'anglais est meilleur qu'en France.

Je n'ai rien contre le doublage mais ça n'a rien d'indispensable.

I've implemented a gradient descent algorithm in python to optimize the shape, and I get essentially the same thing:

I'm changing the title to solved :)

Here's the code: https://pastebin.com/wKvhVvQg

Hi, your quote is fairly accurate.

I deleted my comment because I later found a few references to this Chinese stuff and didn't feel like arguing about it. But basically, I agree with you. This stuff may or may not be innocuous, we can't really know. But there are a zillion better other reasons to oppose AfD.

Reading the paper, exercise alone had no effect on these "biological clocks". So, the results are promising, but given the lackluster results of the trial on other outcomes (blood pressure, mortality, falls, etc.), I'd be cautious before jumping to conclusions.

I think the main question is how exercise alone compares to exercise +supplements. If I have time later I'll try to dig into the paper.

Here's another solution, that is suboptimal but might be preferable to the soap bubble solution in practice: an ellipse with long axis 1.592 and short axis 0.972. This should be close to the optimal ellipse (I used Kepler's approximate P=pi * (a+b) formula for the perimeter). It gives an area of 4.861 which is close enough to the current optimum, and looks like this: