The essence of stuartivity is that one gets comfortable knowing which things one no longer needs to know – your car's licence plate number, sports statistics and recipes, for example – and hence doesn't waste brain cells remembering.
It is easy to think that these stories are simply another round in the familiar game of rebutting utilitarianism by counter-examples, and hence that Williams' integrity objection boils down to the straightforward inference (1) utilitarianism tells Jim to do X and George to do Y, (2) but X and Y are wrong (perhaps because they violate integrity?), so (3) utilitarianism is false.
Therefore, Corollary 3.2 is not applicable to this example, and hence Theorem 3.1 properly contains its Corollary 3.2.
The main result in [16] is not applicable to this example and hence the generalization is proper.
Moreover, such objects bear spatio-temporal relations to themselves — coexisting at some time, for example — and hence are connected by the given definition.
Corollaries 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 are not applicable to this example and hence Theorem 2.1 is an actual extension of its Corollaries 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4.
Therefore, Corollaries 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 are not applicable to this example and hence Theorem 2.1 properly contains its Corollaries 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3.
Also, the conditions of Theorem 4.3 are satisfied, and it is seen that ( 0, 0 ) is the unique coupled common fixed point of g and F in X. Remark 4.2 In the above example, the pair ( g, F ) is compatible but not commuting so that Corollary 4.1 is not applicable to this example, and hence Theorem 4.1 properly contains its Corollary 4.1.
We have chosen n = 6 and h = 4 to fit displacement maps in this example and hence the overall fitting function is formed by 54 terms.
Paragraph 2: "rarely if ever shown how to design a maintainable program in a systematic way" Are they not in fact taught, even if only indirectly, that programs are typically not revisited again once passed on (to the course instructor, for example), and hence thinking about maintainability is wasted effort?
