@abhas_RewCie this would be sad except its their own government allowing their country to be our guinea pigs
@CaptainBohemian no, its a different kind of virus from the usual flu family, and besides, people who got last year's flu vaccine are not even immune to this year's flu (not even considering covid)
@abhas_RewCie this is if herd immunity is the only strategy, right? And what data do we have now of the rate of waning immunity? I haven't looked into the more recent data...
See, in just 50 days of entering of Virus in India, they've discovered that the virus mutated 30 times... So, with such high incredible mutations, we may not have a single vaccine that'd eradicate whole world from covid19
(C) put the army outside and shoot any people on the streets. Now you only need to vaccinate the army + epsilon. Extreme example and ignores realities like food delivery etc but the point is other interventions can lower the effective population at risk and only 50% of those people or whatever need the vaccine
What I've seen is that even though it has been mutating, the way the vaccines hope to work have not been affected significantly (though i guess this is old news)
no, i said vaccination in combination with other strategies reduce the critical threshold needed of the total population for herd immunity to take place
@abhas_RewCie I don't say you would have a mental problem. I just say emotion is the brain's perception of certain bodily changes in response to a stimulus, so we can't really control our emotion. Whether you are happy or not can't be controlled by your will.
yes, even now its more rare to have flu vaccine for free
this is because if u get a flu, mostly its OK, u just stay home and be useless for maybe a month lol. and also the fact that its not so useful after about 1 year
it issues a notice to you to be checked if you want to have some vaccine, but that notice is to be checked and signed by your patents, not you. But I think that's not rational, because children should also have their right and shouldn't let their parents to decide what to do to their body.
I recall in senior high school. our school even required our parent to sign our decision of choosing studying science group or society group. So absurd!
it's we ourselves who are responsible for our decision of studying in science group or society group because we need to look for positions on own own, not by parenrs, after graduation,
@abhas_RewCie I have never had any medicine which claims to be able to change human emotion. I want to experience emotion naturally in order to understand how much I like a thing or hate something.
some parents only know to make money by bank and have never been engaged in a profession and thus can't help their children seek a position in their fields at all.
so in your calculation, you needed to make $|y-y_0|$ smaller than something, so that the potentially bad term $1/|y|$ could be controlled. After you do that, you used the same bound again to directly control $|y_0 - y|$. Do you think this could be improved? @Knight
HERE WE ARE! What's the answer? What does it even mean to get the answer in this case? Do you mean we just want a fancy looking e called epsilon at the RHS?
Then you use the choice of delta, which you haven't decided on yet, you get $$ \left| \frac1y - \frac1{y_0} \right| <\frac{2 \delta}{y_0^2} $$ and you want this to be $< \epsilon$. What $\delta$ to pick?
some parents are that kind of fool who only provide bus ticket for their children to do things for them; they don't know their children need food to work well.
@Knight my school said children who have cold shouldn't have vaccination, and I had a cold in elementary school so often, but I still always had vaccination.
@Knight you use the freedom to choose a smaller $\delta$. a little abstractly, you want both $a<\delta_1$ and $a< \delta_2$. If you can find $\delta_3$ such that $\delta_3 \le \delta_1$ and $\delta_3 \le \delta_2$, then you're done
@CaptainBohemian It's great to see that you and your sister is no longer influenced by your past, it's just reminiscences that makes you sometimes sad.
If a function $f:X\to X$ is defined such that $f\left(f(x)\right)=x$ $\forall x\in X$, is $f$ necessarily bijective? Intuitively I think it should be, but I can't prove this rigorously.
