Stands for "Quod erat demonstrandum" - a latin phrase that means something like "that which was to be proved", although my high school maths teacher said it was "quite easily done"
How is that possible. I see it everywhere where there is anyone proving anything mathematically. I'm not sure how anyone could get through an engineering degree without at least coming across this. Where are you from?
QED is never used (any more) in published mathematics. Using a small square to indicate the end of a proof has been completely standard for many years now.
That's why QED was misinterpreted instead of SOS by the Titanic. The Californian thought they were proving that the angle of a ship could actually stand that high.
Roleybob's being pedantic about acronyms versus initialisations (unless he's one of those who plague this site and like to erroneously argue for 'abbreviations').
These answers are technically not acronyms because the three letters don't make a new word. Examples of true acronyms are 'Agents of SHIELD', 'Enter your PIN' or 'I work for NASA'. Technically, when you say each letter individually, they're initialisations. I say *technically* because English evolves - it's not like French which is officially governed. I like to use the word 'moot' as an example: everyone uses it to mean the opposite of what it actually means (a redundant point, instead of worthy of debate), progressively changing the actual definition.
People like Roleybob just like to troll to make themselves feel smarter than other jetpunkers.
Right. He's not trolling. If you overreact and get angry to such a comment, that's completely on you. There was nothing about what he said that should have provoked any normal person. And if you feel so insecure about your own intelligence that you feel other people making observations are bragging or trying to make themselves feel smart, that's also on you.
I like the way that other pedants come to the aid of pedants when they are accused of being pedantic. It's one of the amusements I find when doing Jetpunk. Being correct does not negate the act of pedantry rather it enhances it.
Until I started using this site I didn't even know the meaning of the word pedant. Then I realized I am one. I don't have a problem with nitpicking as long as it isn't too annoying. It keeps us on the straight and narrow.
Can I add to the pedantry (or perceived pedantry)? A "company president" can be but often is not the CEO. "Company head" or "Company leader" or "Top person in a company" would be a bit more accurate.
This is right. CEO is the chief executive. President usually is a role on the board of directors. They can be the same, but are often different. When they are the same person, the titles are usually separated, "President and CEO" - signifying further that they are not the same.
That's the problem with the English language; it is constantly "evolving" instead of remaining static. It is my second language and now, after almost 30 years, I am finding that words and phrases which I was taught are becoming obsolete. Ex: I was taught that when one is indoors the surface beneath your feet is called the "floor", whilst outside the correct term is "ground". Also,
I seldom hear the term "fewer than" used anymore. It has almost universally been replaced by "less than". WHY?
Constant evolution isn't a "problem" unique to the English language. This is a natural feature of all languages. Usage changes. New generations bend the existing language. In formal usage, there is still a distinction between using "fewer than" for countable objects and "less than" for uncountable objects. Theoretically, one should still say things like "I have fewer dollars than I used to," but "I have less money than I used to." This distinction has mostly disappeared in casual usage, and it is even losing ground in edited writing. I used to lament over this abuse of the language. It grates on my ears, but then I had to admit I was just being stodgy. The distinction doesn't really serve any useful purpose. Regarding "ground" vs "floor," you are still generally correct. What is the "incorrect" usage that you are referring to?
Would you consider accepting MAC for "Cash machine?" It was a name brand in the Philly area that stood for Money Access Center, and as the first widespread ATMs in the area back in the '80s it became a generic term that lasted at least until the early 2000s, and still hangs on a little now (though admittedly not much). When I left central Jersey to go to college in '99, I had to retrain myself to say "ATM" instead of "MAC machine."
In other words....you know full well the general term in the other 99% of the country was ATM and your local company's copyrighted term has been dead even in that 1 tiny area for most of this century now, correct?
HIV is the name of the virus, not the affliction, which is AIDS. It's similar with SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19. Maybe the answer can be rephrased to "Virus causing Magic Johnson's affliction"?
The small square literally stands for QED, we just use the symbol for shorthand it isn't a replacement.
These answers are technically not acronyms because the three letters don't make a new word. Examples of true acronyms are 'Agents of SHIELD', 'Enter your PIN' or 'I work for NASA'. Technically, when you say each letter individually, they're initialisations. I say *technically* because English evolves - it's not like French which is officially governed. I like to use the word 'moot' as an example: everyone uses it to mean the opposite of what it actually means (a redundant point, instead of worthy of debate), progressively changing the actual definition.
People like Roleybob just like to troll to make themselves feel smarter than other jetpunkers.
I seldom hear the term "fewer than" used anymore. It has almost universally been replaced by "less than". WHY?