- 0 Followers
- 0 Following
- 2 Posts
Tilting your ankle sounds right, that’s what I do. Just tilt firmly until the shifter stops moving, release your foot, then release the clutch and ease back on the throttle.
I’ve never had a bike that told me what gear it is in, the old bike was a 1997 Suzuki Katana.
When you shift are you moving the shifter like it owes you until it stops moving?
On my old bike the transmission was kinda sloppy and I occasionally had a missed shift where it didn’t shift out of the current gear because I hadn’t moved the shifter far enough. I never accidentally shifted into neutral on that bike, it was almost impossible to put it into neutral.
I have a 60 tooth 10" Diablo blade in my table saw and haven’t had any complaints. My use case is mostly home diy projects, primarily with fir/pine and plywood, but I have ran oak through it without any issues.
Given the price difference you are seeing I would get the Diablo blade and try it out.
I think a big part will be knowing your saw, how quickly it wants to cut (regardless of the blade) and making sure it isn’t overloaded by exceeding how quickly it wants to cut.
So after rereading the original post (which could have been written clearer) I think your equation in your original comment is written in a way that doesn’t reflect the original post.
According to the original post the right side of the equal sign is cost plus half of the cost where cost is defined as $1. So then the equation would be x = 1+ ½(1) which solves to x = 1.5.
As even 11yos know, but apparently not you, you don’t solve an equation (or a set of equations) by arbitrarily assigning values to the variable.
You are correct that assigning arbitrary values is not how to solve an equation (at least by hand), but I wasn’t trying to solve the equation, I was showing that the equation as written would not be true unless 2 was used.
Juuuuuuuuuuuuust in case that your confusion is related to my usage of “→”: it’s clear by context that the symbol is being used for “implies”.
Since the “→” notation is an alternative notation for a function, it made reading the math in your posts and the words in your posts contradictory. It would seem that you didn’t read the Wikipedia link since the “→” notation is described there.
Ok, call it an equation or a function, it doesn’t matter what it is called, the point was that the original comment is only true for the value that was used.
In the original comment we have “x = 1 + ½x” and the example used was with a cost of two (x=2) to show that the equation was true (ending in 2=2).
However if 4 is used instead (x=4) then we have ( 4 = 1 + ½[4] ) which results in an inequality (4=3) which is false.
Which is why I initially commented with a different letter on either side of the equal sign.
If you prefer to only put the value of x on the right side on the equal sign and not the left side, then a common notation for that is f(x) = 1 + ½x, which is also referred to as function notation.
Can’t have the same letter for the function and the variable, should be like this: y = 0.5(x) + 1
I saw another picture of him in that event from the side and he was wearing ear plugs.
30.48 cm, get it right
/s
Third?
Copied from the last link: “As of June, legislators have proposed at least 19 child labor rollbacks over the past two years. Of those, seven have been signed into law in five states (Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, and New Jersey). Most of the legislation has been authored and advanced by Republican lawmakers. However, Democrats in New Jersey played an integral role in passing a 2022 law that increases the number of hours children can work, and Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer declined to veto a pair of laws enacted in 2022—one to lower the minimum age for working at a liquor store and another the age to serve alcohol.”
