Видео

The falsifiability criterion, essential to a scientific theory, means a theory can *potentially* be falsified by evidence collected from empirical experiments, meaning experiments that compare a theory to nature. This does *not* mean all theories are false. It means all valid theories are *open* to falsification by means of contradicting evidence. Among scientists, calling a theory unfalsifiable essentially means the theory is not scientific. Only theories open to falsification, but that resist falsification, are regarded as science. Reference: www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/falsifiability I hope this clarifies the issue, and thanks for writing.

​@@lutusp I thank you for the reply but I worry that my question hasn't been fully understood. I literally mean, how do I "prove/know" that an theory is open to falsification / able to be compared to nature?

@@omerkaya545 Identifying falsifiable theories is easy -- one simply asks, "Can this theory be proven false in a practical experiment?" The classic example, widely quoted, is to say, "All swans are white." Seeing white swans proves nothing -- it only confirms our assumption that the theory is correct. But seeing a black swan instantly falsifies the theory. The point is we have a practical basis for falsification, one that can be compared to everyday reality. But -- very important -- we must be willing to look for contrary evidence. We must be willing to search for a black swan. Someone unwilling to search for contrary evidence is said to suffer from "confirmatiton bias." Someone ready to look for a falsifying counterexample is called a scientist.

You are most welcome! I bit the bullet and acquired some mini HDMI adaptors for my various Raspberry Pi models, each of which fills some niche role -- like controlling my 3D printer. Handy little computers -- and they put the Apple II to shame!

Thanks for watching and for commenting! You may be aware that I favor free, open-source programs, and SolveSpace is one of the best of that breed. Stay tuned for more videos in the future!

You're most welcome! I especially like making people aware of CadQuery, where you can design models using Python instead of a graphic editor. Thanks for writing!

I just checked at the resource link arachnoid.com/software_defined_radios_II -- everything seems all right. Please say which browser on which platform? Also, does the basic website (arachnoid.com/) display correctly? And thanks for your kind words!

Hi -- without a context, without a diagram, it's not easy to identify possible reasons. Sometimes the menu item "Analyze" ... "Show underconstrained points" (Shift+Ctrl+F) can help. This feature lights up points that aren't properly constrained. I hope this helps -- thanks for writing!

Thanks for watching and writing! I guess Arachnophilia has had its day ... even at my house. :)

Yes, I can make more, but It would help for me to get clarification about "leveling up". Thanks for watching!

Hah! Unfortunately, not as dramatic as the fictional version. Thanks for watching my video!

Thanks! I hope it encourages more people to learn Python, which to me is a very productive language.

You're welcome -- I'm glad you liked it. I'm planning more of the same.

This link seems to show how to set up an rtl-sdr on a Mac: ports.macports.org/port/rtl-sdr/ I don't have a Mac so I can't be sure, but it seems to be true. I hope this helps.

I think eventually these devices will evolve past requiring two distinct phases to cover the frequency range they do. But at the moment this device produces a more efficient match with typical antennas than other similar devices. It's easily distinguished in side-by-side tests. Thanks for writing!

You are most welcome, and thanks for writing!

You're most welcome -- thanks for watching and commenting.

Thanks for writing and watching!

> You have a voice that is relaxing to listen to. Thank you! I wish more people needed to be relaxed. :)

@@lutusp When a calm voice won't do, try medication...lol.

It's interesting that modern chatbots still have a hard time with the bank loan. And it's instructive that none of them (so far) ask whether the payment is to be applied at the beginning or the end of the period, the two classic payment schemes. Thanks for writing!

Thanks for writing and sharing!

Thank you! I hope people understand my reason for downplaying intelligence in and of itself, in favor of its applications. Thanks for your useful feedback!

Thanks -- like you I've been trying to persuade people that there's more to life than browsing. :) I appreciate your support and thanks for writing!

You're most welcome, thanks for writing!

Interesting projects -- thanks for writing!

Yes, complete agreement about Windows, in particular because Microsoft is aggressively pushing ads onto the platform and doing all they can to prevent their removal. Thanks for writing!

That's good news! Remember that CadQuery (mentioned in the video) may help you deal with more complex projects as your skills increase. Thanks for writing!

Thank you! I think stick shifts' days are numbered, unfortunately. Thanks for watching and writing!

@@lutusp Not in the UK! Though I suppose EVs may change that. Thanks for the video.

You're most welcome, and thanks for writing, especially about the algorithm, which I find mysterious and inscrutable. :)

Yes, I knew about the amplitude advantage of FM, but I decided not to try to explain it. :) I was worried about leaving too many viewers behind in the more technical sections. As things stand, there's quite a lot of heavy lifting compared to most RUclips videos, but I wanted people to get a peek behind the curtain, so to speak. Thanks for writing and ...-.- !

Yes, I considered adding this, but I realized people would need a special, somewhat expensive circularly polarized antenna, so I decided against. But it's entirely feasible. Thanks for writing!

Thanks!

Sorry, I can't figure out which key you're describing. If this is still an issue, perhaps you could give me a time in the video so I can see the problem for myself. It might be "rectangle", which uses the R key. I hope this helps.

@@lutusp At 50 minutes into the video, when I'm trying to replicate the drawing, there's always an error when I do shift+l, exactly at that moment it also appears in the top left corner of the video saying to type this combination of a penguin figure + r and I couldn't associate it on my keyboard, maybe it is the cause of the error?

@@lutusp But anyway, thank you very much for your attention, I'm just starting out in solve space and I'm already learning a lot from your videos

@@natanaelmelo9481 Okay, I figured it out. The "Penguin+R" is actually my pausing the screen recorder, it's not a SolveSpace command. Please disregard it and wait for the next actual command. And just in case there are more of those, just ignore any "Penguin+characteer" commands, they're not for SolveSpace. My screen recorder has its own commands, and I sometimes pause the video screen recording to catch my breath. The keyboard recorder dutifully records those keystrokes -- I'll have to think of a way to prevent that. Anyway, when you see the penguin, just ignore those keystrokes. I hope this helps.

@@lutusp lol ok, my friend, thank you very much, now I understand. As for the error that was appearing, it was resolved by limping a box (force nurbs surface to triangle mesh)

Unlike my now-favored environment CadQuery, to fillet in SolveSpace you need to deliberately put rounded corners into your design. This sometimes means changing your approach to a design. So, instead of simply drawing a circle and extruding it using Shift+X (no chance for fillets), to get fillets you would instead change drawing planes, draw a half-cylinder shape *in profile* with intentionally added fillets, then rotate the profile through 360 degrees with Shift+L to get the same cylindrical result with fillets -- fillets you added in the first place. In other words, you must add explicit curves at corners to get fillets -- there's no magic button-press or explicit command as in my CadQuery examples. This is one reason I'm now more in favor of CadQuery than SolveSpace. There are other reasons, this is just one. See more about CadQuery at this time position: ruclips.net/video/blkjW0JauX8/видео.html I hope this helps, and thanks for writing!

> Do you know if there is a way to pad/extrude a solid between two different sketches Here's an example: imgur.com/gallery/QFu65j8 It shows three versions of two solids, one local, one imported, that overlap -- with different colors so they can be distinguished. The images show union, difference, and intersection. Again, one of the images is locally generated, the other is imported from another SolveSpace session. The same result can be gotten for two solids, both imported, into an empty parent SolveSpace session. In fact, in my assembly example in the most recent video, three arrows all overlap with one another, from a separate SolveSpace file, and they get along fine. That could have been three unique solids, all from different files. I hope this clarifies how this works, but if not, please ask a more detailed question.

@@lutusp Thank you but i meant more like a tube that changes cross-sectional shape as it progresses.

@@BAD_CONSUMER Okay, but what would this have to do with an assembly? Since what you describe could be performed in one SolveSpace script? An assembly would only add complexity with no compensating advantage. Also, I would need to see either a picture or an equation to know what you mean in a clear way. Here's a circle becoming a square: imgur.com/9baW1kP -- only because I can't figure out what you're trying to describe. I hope this helps.

Thanks for posting! Yes, I'm planning to create more CAD/CAM videos. I know about OpenScad, but I need to get more experience with it, see if it's as easy to use as CadQuery, find out how many export file types it supports. Again, thanks!

You are most welcome! I'm glad this video is reaching the right people.

Thanks for posting! It's always nice to hear from someone with the same awful experiences. :)

solvespace is not malware - it is safe if you download it from solvespace.com/ -- be sure you download from this URL. Thanks for writing!

@@lutusp Gracias, ya lo descargue y lo probé. Era un falso positivo que dió la licencia.

@@________________ buenas noticias! Y gracias.

You are most welcome! I'm planning more SolveSpace tutorials.

Good suggestion! It's not difficult, but also perhaps not obvious. This is now on my list. Thanks for posting!

It depends on how you mean "rotate". But try holding down the Ctrl key and right mouse button while dragging the mouse for one kind of rotation. Then try pressing the Shift key and right mouse button while dragging, for another kind. I hope this helps.

@@lutusp Thank you very much, it worked

@@natanaelmelo9481 You're welcome. Some SolveSpace users have complained that the rotations aren't intuitive, but I think over time it gets easier.

To be direct, SolveSpace's filleting is less robust than in FreeCAD, and AFAIK the TNP has the same status -- it's not directly addressed or mitigated and is only less an issue because SolveSpace's projects tend not to be as complex as those in FreeCAD. I would be happy to be corrected about this view, but it's to the best of my understanding. The issue in both SolveSpace and FreeCAD that I find most annoying is the fact that you cannot change an element from which other elements spring without destroying the entire assembly. That would require a level of code robustness that neither program possesses at this time. The main reason I prefer SolveSpace over FreeCAD is that the former is less opaque to a new user. There are times with FreeCAD where I have no idea how to take he next step and the documentation doesn't help, or a feature isn't robust enough to accommodate what one might call s common-sense approach. Thanks for writing!