Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(10)
It was derived for the case when and is not strictly true for all circumstances when the temperature of the body and the cavity are different, but it is true if,, so the absorptance and emittance are not functions of.
This is strictly true for an umbral eclipse, and marginally true for a penumbral one (if you run through the calculation again using 3 degrees instead of 2 everywhere, you find that the Moon moves 3 degrees in about a month, so it's too close to tell).
It is true that the second law of thermodynamics, according to which randomness always increases, is time asymmetrical, but this law is not strictly true (for example, the phenomenon of Brownian motion contravenes it), and it is now regarded as a statistical derivative of the fundamental laws together with certain boundary conditions.
The former is not strictly true for all binary stars i.e. an evolved AGB-star has a wind of 5-30 km s−1 (e.g. Höfner 2015), which is comparable to the velocity of stars in a binary of (aapprox 10^{3}R_{odot }).
While this is not strictly true, for reasons that don't matter here, it is a great baseline to use for changing your lifestyle based upon information you get from monitoring, or quantifying, your calories in and calories out.
I mean, that's not strictly true – for example, pubs – but still: tax, the job market, small-talk, the slow decay of your body, not being able to play football in the park without feeling weird, having to dance in public, everything.
Similar(50)
That's not strictly true, of course.
Although this is strictly true only for a uniform ambient field ({mathbf{B}}_0), FACs give, even for a real distribution of currents, only a very small contribution to F. Fig. 3 Normalized L-curves for 6 individual orbits: orbit no.
If it were strictly true, it would predict, for example, that in the course of a chick's development, it would go through the following stages: a single celled organism, a multi-celled invertebrate ancestor, a fish, a lizard-like reptile, an ancestral bird, and then finally, a baby chick.
The explicit statement that there has been no 'substantially improved treatment' for prostate cancer is not strictly true.
This wasn't strictly true but I was happy to bow to Moin's preference for discretion over valour.
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