Consider this.

If we want to figure out the argument.

Let's say that we were given the argument and the

And now let's figure out it's argument.

This is our contradiction.

AG Okay, hypothesis two.

Will they?

Let's say we want to figure out the argument.

We find that premise quite exciting.

The evidence makes them change that hypothesis.

It's an extremely dawning hypothesis.

So premise one is we'd be destroying the world, and then premise two is, why don't we get prepared for it?

That is the premise of this particular presentation.

We want to figure out it's magnitude and we want to figure out it's argument.

Or maybe it's chemicals.

That's what the assumption we started off with.

And he called it hypothesis free science.

But this premise is wrong, for three reasons.

I'm not sure if, you know, this was the right call.

He kept it to himself for 30 years.

Understandably, this thesis has not met with universal approbation.

The third, is this too much information?

The premise behind the mystery magic box was the following

Then they test that new hypothesis and so on and so forth.

And so if we wanted a solve for this argument we would say that the argument is equal to the arctan or the inverse tangent of b over a.

This hypothesis may soon get a real world test.

He posts arguments in support and against this notion on his blog here.

The tangent of the argument is going to be equal to the opposite side over the adjacent side

And this is a stand in for many, many kinds of illusions that are explained by this hypothesis.

In ADHD, it's often assumed that the hyperactivity causes the learning disability.

But how am I going to how am I going to deal with that hypothesis?

This hypothesis is supported by clinical trials and other studies.

They soon realized that there was nothing they could do given that Fambaré Ouattara Natchaba, President of the National Assembly, was not in Togo.

But Mary went further.

But how am I going to deal with that hypothesis?

You know, it basically uses as its central premise Greek mythology.

Bentham's premise, he's affirming it. he says very explicitly the sole evidence, it is possible to produce that anything is desirable is that people actually do desire it. so he stays with the idea that our de facto actual empirical desires are the only basis for moral judgment. but then page eight also in chapter two, he argues that it is possible for a utilitarian to distinguish higher from lower pleasures. now, those of you who've read

And the premise was, a supercomputer has calculated that humans have only 23 years left on the planet.

The first days of the conflict in Georgia crushed this hypothesis.

Empirical evidence yields no clear answer concerning which hypothesis is correct.

Thirdly, the premises underpinning the Akosombo Accord were fundamentally flawed.

The assumption that the granting of independence was the only way to make progress had evaporated.

So you would have cosine of the argument is equal to r is equal to the adjacent over the hypotenuse.

And now let's think about it let's draw it on an Argand diagram do visualize the argument.

So the physics is that you cannot prove a hypothesis, but it's easy to disprove it any hypothesis is shaky.