Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
Local polls put Schodorf ahead, but by only a statistically immaterial 3%.
Similar(59)
Here we see a statistically significant variance.
That is not a statistically significant difference.
MaterialObject would remain consistent as long as we do not explicitly state that there is nothing that can be both a material and an immaterial object: Immaterial Object ⊑ ¬ MaterialObject (with ¬ being the negation operator 'not'not
To the victims of mass slaughter, the distinction between a gun or a bomb is immaterial.
But in conjunction with the result of 75.2, now we have a soul that is an immaterial subsistent, where in conjunction with 75.3 the souls of other animals are not immaterial subsistents.
I think that is a rather immaterial point.
Yet these are crucial psychological components within a weightless, immaterial medium.
Prime matter, though entirely without form, is actual; and a purely immaterial being is not automatically bereft of potentiality.
Nevertheless, a source immaterial continuant can be part of either an immaterial or a material continuant.
So, we can only relate a source material continuant to a target material continuant, while we can only relate a source immaterial continuant to a target immaterial continuant.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com