qwizoking
Well-Known Member
I like seedsDamn you are good! I figured I was safeI'm running short on quatloos this month can I sub seeds?
PS Sunflower (of course)
*cough
Random Jibber Jabber Thread
- Thread starter Trolling
- Start date
*cough
neosapien
Well-Known Member
Thank you. That was exactly the clarification I was looking for. Since my hike has been postponed by someone not wanting their glutinous rice I shall comment on current affairs.
You could just cam up and put there delusions (or intuitions) to rest right? Jus saying. Or maybe just one of the many crack hoes you fuck can do a show for us. Jus saying. Or do nothing and live with the second guessing. Jus saying. Or you could go to church today and repent. Jus Satan.
neosapien
Well-Known Member
Also @abe supercro what are the atrocities that my brethren bear and Annie have doth committed? These are grievous accusations that I can only think to be unfounded and untrue. What say you on these matters? Four score and ten years ago and other things that make this sound official.
srh88
Well-Known Member
qwizoking
Well-Known Member
Lol neo..
Ay I don't really care if people think I'm homeless and never smoked bud..
I'm here for my own entertainment.
If it bothers you..just skip posts that aren't "educational". And say to yourself this fake mofo talkin again lol.
In all fairness.. They told me to go on tc and kick it.. Soooo can't complain too much.
Its not like I really want to show myself.. I still have a professional real life thing goin. Riu could easily destroy my career of some disgruntled member was so inclined
I've posted plenty of pics. They just wanna see me
Ay I don't really care if people think I'm homeless and never smoked bud..
I'm here for my own entertainment.
If it bothers you..just skip posts that aren't "educational". And say to yourself this fake mofo talkin again lol.
In all fairness.. They told me to go on tc and kick it.. Soooo can't complain too much.
Its not like I really want to show myself.. I still have a professional real life thing goin. Riu could easily destroy my career of some disgruntled member was so inclined
I've posted plenty of pics. They just wanna see me
srh88
Well-Known Member
lol dude you posted your phone number and address on here before. homeless and never smoked bud? haha who said that? real professional life and still running trap houses though. thats where im calling bullshit. you flat out said you were rich. who the fuck would risk that shit running something as stupid as a trap house. its ok, on the internet you can be whatever you want to be. today im a dinosaur, tomorrow i think im going to be pharmacist who also owns a ranch and smokes crack
Indacouch
Well-Known Member
Do you need a Pharma tech ....I'm hooked on heroin and I can count good ....please boss put me in the opiate section I won't let you down
qwizoking
Well-Known Member
Yup several times.. I've posted that.
Lol ohs nos not crack?! Cocaine in the nose is ok but in the lungs?! Aaaaaahhhhhhhh
Lol
Ya I've posted pics of pearl and of hard..
You question why I do what I do. So does everyone else.. So do I.
I wonder how many times I've been told I'm intentionally throwing my life away by doing drugs. And trappin. Gambling with my future
But I like the lifestyle. Like hood rats. Like the ghetto. And like being Damn high
When I got divorced a couple years back I kinda said fuck it and started going hard.
But like I said. You can think whatever, doesn't bother me any.
Cause I don't go cam lmao
Lol ohs nos not crack?! Cocaine in the nose is ok but in the lungs?! Aaaaaahhhhhhhh
Lol
Ya I've posted pics of pearl and of hard..
You question why I do what I do. So does everyone else.. So do I.
I wonder how many times I've been told I'm intentionally throwing my life away by doing drugs. And trappin. Gambling with my future
But I like the lifestyle. Like hood rats. Like the ghetto. And like being Damn high
When I got divorced a couple years back I kinda said fuck it and started going hard.
But like I said. You can think whatever, doesn't bother me any.
Cause I don't go cam lmao
srh88
Well-Known Member
Singlemalt
Well-Known Member
PREDATOR-PREY DYNAMICS: LOTKA-VOLTERRA
Introduction: The Lotka-Volterra model is composed of a pair of differential equations that describe predator-prey (or herbivore-plant, or parasitoid-host) dynamics in their simplest case (one predator population, one prey population). It was developed independently by Alfred Lotka and Vito Volterra in the 1920's, and is characterized by oscillations in the population size of both predator and prey, with the peak of the predator's oscillation lagging slightly behind the peak of the prey's oscillation. The model makes several simplifying assumptions: 1) the prey population will grow exponentially when the predator is absent; 2) the predator population will starve in the absence of the prey population (as opposed to switching to another type of prey); 3) predators can consume infinite quantities of prey; and 4) there is no environmental complexity (in other words, both populations are moving randomly through a homogeneous environment).
Importance: Predators and prey can influence one another's evolution. Traits that enhance a predator's ability to find and capture prey will be selected for in the predator, while traits that enhance the prey's ability to avoid being eaten will be selected for in the prey. The "goals" of these traits are not compatible, and it is the interaction of these selective pressures that influences the dynamics of the predator and prey populations. Predicting the outcome of species interactions is also of interest to biologists trying to understand how communities are structured and sustained.
Question: What are the predictions of the Lotka-Volterra model? Are they supported by empirical evidence?
Variables:
P number of predators or consumers
N number of prey or biomass of plants
t time
r growth rate of prey
a' searching efficiency/attack rate
q predator or consumer mortality rate
c predatorís or consumerís efficiency at turning food into offspring (conversion efficiency)
Methods: We begin by looking at what happens to the predator population in the absence of prey; without food resources, their numbers are expected to decline exponentially, as described by the following equation:
.
(1)
This equation uses the product of the number of predators (P) and the predator mortality rate (q) to describe the rate of decrease (because of the minus sign on the right-hand side of the equation) of the predator population (P) with respect to time (t). In the presence of prey, however, this decline is opposed by the predator birth rate, caíPN, which is determined by the consumption rate (aíPN, which is the attack rate[a'] multiplied by the product of the number of predators [P] times the number of prey [N]) and by the predatorís ability to turn food into offspring (c). As predator and prey numbers (P and N, respectively) increase, their encounters become more frequent, but the actual rate of consumption will depend on the attack rate (aí). The equation describing the predator population dynamics becomes
.
(2)
The product ca'P is the predator's numerical response, or the per capita increase as a function of prey abundance. The entire term, ca'PN, tells us that increases in the predator population are proportional to the product of predator and prey abundance.
Turning to the prey population, we would expect that without predation, the numbers of prey would increase exponentially. The following equation describes the rate of increase of the prey population with respect to time, where r is the growth rate of the prey population, and N is the abundance of the prey population:
.
(3)
In the presence of predators, however, the prey population is prevented from increasing exponentially. The term for consumption rate from above (aíPN) describes prey mortality, and the population dynamics of the prey can be described by the equation
.
(4)
The product of a' and P is the predator's functional response, or rate of prey capture as a function of prey abundance (see TYPE I or TYPE II functional response modules). Here the term a'PN reflects the fact that losses from the prey population due to predation are proportional to the product of predator and prey abundances.
Equations (2) and (4) describe predator and prey population dynamics in the presence of one another, and together make up the Lotka-Volterra predator-prey model. The model predicts a cyclical relationship between predator and prey numbers: as the number of predators (P) increases so does the consumption rate (a'PN), tending to reinforce the increase in P. Increase in consumption rate, however, has an obvious consequence-- a decrease in the number of prey (N), which in turn causes P (and therefore a'PN) to decrease. As a'PN decreases the prey population is able to recover, and N increases. Now P can increase, and the cycle begins again. This graph shows the cyclical relationship predicted by the model for hypothetical predator and prey populations.
Huffaker (195
reared two species of mites to demonstrate these coupled oscillations of predator and prey densities in the laboratory. Using Typhlodromus occidentalis as the predator and the six-spotted mite (Eotetranychus sexmaculatus) as the prey, Huffaker constructed environments composed of varying numbers of oranges (fed on by the prey) and rubber balls on trays. The oranges were partially covered with wax to control the amount of feeding area available to E. sexmaculatus, and dispersed among the rubber balls. The results of one of the many permutations of his experiments are graphed below. Note that the prey population size is on the left vertical axis and the predator population is on the right vertical axis, and that the scales of the two are different (after Huffaker, 1958 [fig.18]).
Interpretation: It is apparent from the graph that both populations showed cyclical behavior, and that the predator population generally tracked the peaks in the prey population. However, there is some information about this experiment that we need to consider before concluding that the experimental results truly support the predictions made by the Lotka-Volterra model. To achieve the results graphed here, Huffaker added considerable complexity to the environment. Food resources for E. sexmaculatus (the oranges), were spread further apart than in previous experiments, which meant that food resources for T. occidentalis (i.e., E. sexmaculatus) were also spread further apart. Additionally, the oranges were partially isolated with vaseline barriers, but the prey's ability to disperse was facilitated by the presence of upright sticks from which they could ride air currents to other parts of the environment. In other words, predator and prey were not encountering one another randomly in the environment (see assumption 4 from the Introduction).
Conclusions: A good model must be simple enough to be mathematically tractable, but complex enough to represent a system realistically. Realism is often sacrificed for simplicity, and one of the shortcomings of the Lotka-Volterra model is its reliance on unrealistic assumptions. For example, prey populations are limited by food resources and not just by predation, and no predator can consume infinite quantities of prey. Many other examples of cyclical relationships between predator and prey populations have been demonstrated in the laboratory or observed in nature, but in general these are better fit by models incorporating terms that represent carrying capacity (the maximum population size that a given environment can support) for the prey population, realistic functional responses (how a predator's consumption rate changes as prey densities change) for the predator population, and complexity in the environment.
http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~gross/bioed/bealsmodules/predator-prey.html
Introduction: The Lotka-Volterra model is composed of a pair of differential equations that describe predator-prey (or herbivore-plant, or parasitoid-host) dynamics in their simplest case (one predator population, one prey population). It was developed independently by Alfred Lotka and Vito Volterra in the 1920's, and is characterized by oscillations in the population size of both predator and prey, with the peak of the predator's oscillation lagging slightly behind the peak of the prey's oscillation. The model makes several simplifying assumptions: 1) the prey population will grow exponentially when the predator is absent; 2) the predator population will starve in the absence of the prey population (as opposed to switching to another type of prey); 3) predators can consume infinite quantities of prey; and 4) there is no environmental complexity (in other words, both populations are moving randomly through a homogeneous environment).
Importance: Predators and prey can influence one another's evolution. Traits that enhance a predator's ability to find and capture prey will be selected for in the predator, while traits that enhance the prey's ability to avoid being eaten will be selected for in the prey. The "goals" of these traits are not compatible, and it is the interaction of these selective pressures that influences the dynamics of the predator and prey populations. Predicting the outcome of species interactions is also of interest to biologists trying to understand how communities are structured and sustained.
Question: What are the predictions of the Lotka-Volterra model? Are they supported by empirical evidence?
Variables:
P number of predators or consumers
N number of prey or biomass of plants
t time
r growth rate of prey
a' searching efficiency/attack rate
q predator or consumer mortality rate
c predatorís or consumerís efficiency at turning food into offspring (conversion efficiency)
Methods: We begin by looking at what happens to the predator population in the absence of prey; without food resources, their numbers are expected to decline exponentially, as described by the following equation:
(1)
This equation uses the product of the number of predators (P) and the predator mortality rate (q) to describe the rate of decrease (because of the minus sign on the right-hand side of the equation) of the predator population (P) with respect to time (t). In the presence of prey, however, this decline is opposed by the predator birth rate, caíPN, which is determined by the consumption rate (aíPN, which is the attack rate[a'] multiplied by the product of the number of predators [P] times the number of prey [N]) and by the predatorís ability to turn food into offspring (c). As predator and prey numbers (P and N, respectively) increase, their encounters become more frequent, but the actual rate of consumption will depend on the attack rate (aí). The equation describing the predator population dynamics becomes
(2)
The product ca'P is the predator's numerical response, or the per capita increase as a function of prey abundance. The entire term, ca'PN, tells us that increases in the predator population are proportional to the product of predator and prey abundance.
Turning to the prey population, we would expect that without predation, the numbers of prey would increase exponentially. The following equation describes the rate of increase of the prey population with respect to time, where r is the growth rate of the prey population, and N is the abundance of the prey population:
(3)
In the presence of predators, however, the prey population is prevented from increasing exponentially. The term for consumption rate from above (aíPN) describes prey mortality, and the population dynamics of the prey can be described by the equation
(4)
The product of a' and P is the predator's functional response, or rate of prey capture as a function of prey abundance (see TYPE I or TYPE II functional response modules). Here the term a'PN reflects the fact that losses from the prey population due to predation are proportional to the product of predator and prey abundances.
Equations (2) and (4) describe predator and prey population dynamics in the presence of one another, and together make up the Lotka-Volterra predator-prey model. The model predicts a cyclical relationship between predator and prey numbers: as the number of predators (P) increases so does the consumption rate (a'PN), tending to reinforce the increase in P. Increase in consumption rate, however, has an obvious consequence-- a decrease in the number of prey (N), which in turn causes P (and therefore a'PN) to decrease. As a'PN decreases the prey population is able to recover, and N increases. Now P can increase, and the cycle begins again. This graph shows the cyclical relationship predicted by the model for hypothetical predator and prey populations.
Huffaker (195
reared two species of mites to demonstrate these coupled oscillations of predator and prey densities in the laboratory. Using Typhlodromus occidentalis as the predator and the six-spotted mite (Eotetranychus sexmaculatus) as the prey, Huffaker constructed environments composed of varying numbers of oranges (fed on by the prey) and rubber balls on trays. The oranges were partially covered with wax to control the amount of feeding area available to E. sexmaculatus, and dispersed among the rubber balls. The results of one of the many permutations of his experiments are graphed below. Note that the prey population size is on the left vertical axis and the predator population is on the right vertical axis, and that the scales of the two are different (after Huffaker, 1958 [fig.18]).
Interpretation: It is apparent from the graph that both populations showed cyclical behavior, and that the predator population generally tracked the peaks in the prey population. However, there is some information about this experiment that we need to consider before concluding that the experimental results truly support the predictions made by the Lotka-Volterra model. To achieve the results graphed here, Huffaker added considerable complexity to the environment. Food resources for E. sexmaculatus (the oranges), were spread further apart than in previous experiments, which meant that food resources for T. occidentalis (i.e., E. sexmaculatus) were also spread further apart. Additionally, the oranges were partially isolated with vaseline barriers, but the prey's ability to disperse was facilitated by the presence of upright sticks from which they could ride air currents to other parts of the environment. In other words, predator and prey were not encountering one another randomly in the environment (see assumption 4 from the Introduction).
Conclusions: A good model must be simple enough to be mathematically tractable, but complex enough to represent a system realistically. Realism is often sacrificed for simplicity, and one of the shortcomings of the Lotka-Volterra model is its reliance on unrealistic assumptions. For example, prey populations are limited by food resources and not just by predation, and no predator can consume infinite quantities of prey. Many other examples of cyclical relationships between predator and prey populations have been demonstrated in the laboratory or observed in nature, but in general these are better fit by models incorporating terms that represent carrying capacity (the maximum population size that a given environment can support) for the prey population, realistic functional responses (how a predator's consumption rate changes as prey densities change) for the predator population, and complexity in the environment.
http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~gross/bioed/bealsmodules/predator-prey.html
Indacouch
Well-Known Member
I would be deeply heartbroken if qwiz actually wasn't the trap house running rich truck driver ...and cartel associate ....not to mention Pharma expert amongst other things he said he is ......
Qwiz if you were to confess to being let's say a simple gas station attendant or a pastor of a church and your just here to save us .......it would change the face of Riu .........I could see it now ....
Fox--BREAKING NEWS ~~~~
Qwiz of Riu confesses to being simple folk just like the rest of us
Qwiz if you were to confess to being let's say a simple gas station attendant or a pastor of a church and your just here to save us .......it would change the face of Riu .........I could see it now ....
Fox--BREAKING NEWS ~~~~
Qwiz of Riu confesses to being simple folk just like the rest of us
abe supercro
Well-Known Member
Awesome that thou hast asked.
@neosapien
Please give me a day to fully respond to this properly. I have a big day planned today with yoga, city trip etc. I don't want to respond hastily, which I probably did initially when attempting to put this all to rest. If I had been calmer initially and more understanding (perhaps) this would almost be a non-issue right now.
@neosapien
Please give me a day to fully respond to this properly. I have a big day planned today with yoga, city trip etc. I don't want to respond hastily, which I probably did initially when attempting to put this all to rest. If I had been calmer initially and more understanding (perhaps) this would almost be a non-issue right now.
abe supercro
Well-Known Member
An overview is...
I tried to keep all this bologna off forum but clearly I failed at that, but I'm not to blame for that. I tried to strike a deal/understanding but the 'wizards' made zero concessions, flat out zero. If they say we had a deal, like cannabineer did, he lied. All while preaching merits of honestly blah blah. I was pissed off in my communication so I was too accusatory and abrupt with delicate phat egos but my intention was good.. being diplomatic, including both of them and a mod in a convo, so as to be transparent. I won't include any other details about our pm but the wizards were defensive to say the least, they were worked up by being called out by lil ol me!!
Ok they-were-calm, but they were pissed, defensive and also offensive. Clearly a situation with a mini-mob of type-A ppl and imo, sadly, a few with smug ass superiority complexes. I can't stand that bullshit, no wonder we clash. I'm a street pig that knows how to tie a double Windsor. I don't blame them, or their egos, considering the way most of you suck their dicks lol. Truth!
Obviously I'm a man who dgaf who you think you are. This is a pot forum, keep that shit in perspective esteemed homies and Pablo. The only person's credentials I care about are the owner of the site and anyone who has the power to ban me, other than that you're all the same in my eyes. If I'm going out of my way to be a dick to you, you goddamn bet there's a substantial reason; One which I'll explain as succinctly as possible, only later.
I'll break this shit down to a fkn tee.
Canabineer will then customarily accuse me of "deep massaging" the facts, but that's just his way of implementing his shut-the-fuck-up-son...I am in charge!? Hahah, a truer than true control freak beatch. I find their gambit amusing but just as soon not squabble on forum or be passive aggressively trolled by mothersmugger leg humpers. Nao, if I reffered to anyone as what is perceived as an unsavory name, it was meant as a term of endearment. well at least that how we talk where I come from by way of Namibia. And I'm trying real hard to be a Sir.
I tried to keep all this bologna off forum but clearly I failed at that, but I'm not to blame for that. I tried to strike a deal/understanding but the 'wizards' made zero concessions, flat out zero. If they say we had a deal, like cannabineer did, he lied. All while preaching merits of honestly blah blah. I was pissed off in my communication so I was too accusatory and abrupt with delicate phat egos but my intention was good.. being diplomatic, including both of them and a mod in a convo, so as to be transparent. I won't include any other details about our pm but the wizards were defensive to say the least, they were worked up by being called out by lil ol me!!
Ok they-were-calm, but they were pissed, defensive and also offensive. Clearly a situation with a mini-mob of type-A ppl and imo, sadly, a few with smug ass superiority complexes. I can't stand that bullshit, no wonder we clash. I'm a street pig that knows how to tie a double Windsor. I don't blame them, or their egos, considering the way most of you suck their dicks lol. Truth!
Obviously I'm a man who dgaf who you think you are. This is a pot forum, keep that shit in perspective esteemed homies and Pablo. The only person's credentials I care about are the owner of the site and anyone who has the power to ban me, other than that you're all the same in my eyes. If I'm going out of my way to be a dick to you, you goddamn bet there's a substantial reason; One which I'll explain as succinctly as possible, only later.
I'll break this shit down to a fkn tee.
Canabineer will then customarily accuse me of "deep massaging" the facts, but that's just his way of implementing his shut-the-fuck-up-son...I am in charge!? Hahah, a truer than true control freak beatch. I find their gambit amusing but just as soon not squabble on forum or be passive aggressively trolled by mothersmugger leg humpers. Nao, if I reffered to anyone as what is perceived as an unsavory name, it was meant as a term of endearment. well at least that how we talk where I come from by way of Namibia. And I'm trying real hard to be a Sir.
BarnBuster
Virtually Unknown Member
Singlemalt
Well-Known Member
Universal Life Church; Pastafarian Church, etc. $20-25 gets you a diploma/cred as a minister with all the legal bennies of being one. I paid the 25 and got one for the ex, and she actually officiated a wedding for some idiot friend of hers