CuriosOne

If there is an equal amount of 1/2 fractions of pennies, they can be "glued" together to make them whole again.. "How About That?" 12 "one halves" of 1 penny As 6 10ths of a "deci meter" of 1 second ""Six Tenths"" Again, How about that?? ""Thanks For The Image""" Neither am I...Apparently though I'm onto something greater than u can imagine..

Does the same apply for pennies as to atoms? Oh I forget its not atoms we measure but "matter material" thats "some how" is massless unless gravity effects it...😎 Thank god for Galileo..

Agreed... So if our 100 pennies = 1 dollar... Does 6 *$1.00.00 "one dollar and zero cents" mean $6.00.00 ?? six dollars and zero cents? "There is a very good reason i added the extra dot" And I know Members Are Not Going To Like It. The currency is a chosen system, but numbers are numbers??

Is this as 2 pennies plus 6 pennies is 8 pennies?? could we also say 6/2 = 3 pennies Does this mean that all 3 pennies are1/2 * 6 pennies = smaller pennies? Im totally confused..

I see spelling errors all the time, as im sure do others...Why are you polluting my OP with this?? Please stop making it look as though "anyone" can join the goodole science team, it don't work like that. Its more than "obvious" this science forum "LIES" and tries very hard to make "thinkers" feel stupid or try attacking the ego by noticing "spelling" errors or other "non important" points to diverge from truly saying.. Sorry we dont know the answer to your question... I know other members read this and dont comment for fear of getting bad reputations... Can you state the reasons again?? Why the super positions did not last for long?

That can be re-assembled using roots...1/2 3/12 = 0.25 is as easy as 4/16 =0.25 3/4*1/3=0.25 Notice how 3/4 controls 1/3 =0.333...------> infinity.. "Through base 10 "obviously." As 0.25*16=4*3 = 12+3 = 15 *(2x) =30*(2x)= 60 There is that minute you spoke of...lol 60/ [10* (3/12)^1/2] =12 12-3= 3^2+1 = """BASE 10"""" So a number between 0 and 1 "Uses Base 10"" "from what I see." ------->>>Is there a better way???

Because "you dont know." Well, i was told angular momentum is quantized, so the system you speak of must be orbiting at some angle within some time frame.. I was also told that the energy of a photon is "quanta." 0.001% where did this come from??? How can you have more than 100% of anything??? I swear either the books i read are lieing are this science forum is lieing...

Not at all....You make it sound as though nature has no underlining order, im almost insulted by this.. I guess this explains random prices.. What a unique system of permutations we have..lol

"""A number between 0 and 1""" I'm getting this right out of """text books"" This is why i dont like to Google information and may explain confusions.. Proper fraction larger number on top smaller number on bottom. Improper fraction is this thing in reverse. So then, a number between 0 and 1 must be "a base?" I dont need to define anything, you either know or you dont... Do you know?? Yes or No?? Sounds like a product to me, not a number..

My assertions comes from limited information by scientist and their books on it, of which I've spent $100.00s on... They should say y = x^2 is circular or "frequency based." that y' = 2x is "distance based" or "intrigal based." They should make note that our default base is 10.. They should say that calculus uses the "same rules" as geometry and not make it look vastly complex when in fact it's quite simpler than most imagine.... The issue im having is the "permiscuos" use to describe "the same thing." I did ask studiot what they meant.. Did you read it??

What are numbers between 0 and 1??

I assumed at these levels we "all knew what you just mentioned "accept the strong gravity note" atleast for me."" Maybe I should be more specific..Thnx for letting me know.. studiot has already illuminated my question with some very good points about "coorporation" something the science community needs dire help on! I however would not jump so fast to judge my level of knowlwedge... It's just that when I read, tiny change in y over a tiny change in x, it makes me think "something in between" is shared and maybe that was what studiot "hinted" whom knows... ""I like the more simple approach I guess.."" If science did not have BIG GAPS, I would not be so confused on my so called "un-related facts" because they work just as good at marginal levels outside of the more theoretical guidance of "ideas." "But I do get what your saying."

Do Vertual Particles "Only" Superimpose? And how likely could this idea be modeled in a "Macro" Phiscal Reality "General Relativity" example, and serve as some use in our modern understanding of nature's realms?

""You Seriously Need To Be Jocking""" The premise of my question deals on the "Reconciliation" of Gravity "Macro" and General Relativity "Macro." Thanks for pointing this out, because I was under the assumption that this "could never" be visually scene...But for the most part it appears to be atomic based "unless there is more info in other discoveries." I'm glad im actually getting "positive results" thnks so much for this link.. I've seen similar videos but get very uttered with the narration and connection to my OP.. Very "Impressive Explanation!!!" Best I've heard in all my studies!!! My insight leads me thinking that... Particles have a "choice" they can either work together or not, in effect of this "union" they effect the physical world?? Particle Wave, rings that bell.. Is this what you mean?? Also, you mention effects """restricted only""" on a "minute" part of large macroscopic objects due to transitions "quantum of energy." "Sounds Like Limits dy/dx" to me But is this minute 60*60 = 1 minute? Sounds circular to me, ie angular momentum obviously.. This Minute...Earth time? Space Time? How do you put an atom in a super position?? And to point it out, are the atoms "vertual copies" of itself?? As in the elephant scenario?? If this is the case, "I'm so surprised" the science community hasn't figured it out yet, or may have already! Read exactually what you just said..🤣

No math, no theories simple question..

This reminds me of my original post.. What's the point of Calculus?? Maybe I should have asked this.. But anyway... Is Math and Physics "Interchangeable?"

"HOOOOLLLDD ON THERE ""PLEASE""" -1 Means -16 as in 1/1e-4 = -1 Just like you said 1 and -1 Of 2 input values or opposites? Distance and Time??? Can I see an example??? Neither do I, and that's what I'm asking... Everything even in chemistry has a ,"base." A default a template... Understood, I think I may need to invest more time in acoustic sound waves because your mount Everest Anology appears to be similar with numbers, I'm seeing this all over the place, no joke!

Is asking basic questions about math really make others think a person is dumb?? I mean on science forums..?? Where did math come from? What connects reality to math?? Why with so many numbers, a base is needed?? Might as well say (Everything of Function x) since that's how the thing works.. Put one input into function x it gives you 2.. That statement hasn't made sense since it was created.. But, Perhaps the situation is reversed..🤣🤣🤣 I just found that exponential functions use "Puportionality Constants as limits.. Which makes our simple into more complex scenarios..

Oops sorry I was referring to the default base of ten, I should have mentioned this.. But isn't that "still" a relavant question to the OP?? So only one value may be used each time you use the equation.. Let's say f(x) where x is a distance variable and y is a time variable.. As in distance/time = a quantity at some rate per unit of time.... In this sceneraio what is x then?? Its seems to be "distance, time and rate" There is a logic to why I ask about something so simple, yet seldom talked about or at least I've noticed... Should x just be a rate of base 10??? That is the default of algebra and is the reason for ""like terms"" such as x/x = 1 or x^2....All bundled up together?? Something does not appear correct here..

I'd agree to move this to speculations... its a good read..

Maybe light is "refined." But this makes matters very confusing now due in part of how "radio" transmission travels at light speeds in "any medium." My idea behind light being frozen, is that "space" has no medium... I'm not sure if I can answer your question..I think the emission and absorption idea is 100% correct.. Why?? "Particles have spin and act as little magents." "Heat Energy is Quantized" "Radio transmission travels at the speed of light." 3*10^8 Still not sure where that 3 comes from though. "Then we have: "The Heat Transfer" Ideas."

This does make my issue "more clear" as ""it is"" one point in between 2 locations, but not sure how 2 inputs for x connects the dots together "from the curve" this points "touches" on the surface of this curve.. ""This is my idea"" It leads me to think of the logic behind calculus and ""triangles"" and the all too good pythagorean theorem, and believe it or not the ideas behind if a derivitive can be found "depending on what "point" ""the angle"" is found obviously 360, 90, 180, and 270 all =0 at least in our modern coorodinent system.... Note: I get this idea from particles in a B field, ie Alternating Currents..

I thought so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But none of my books tell me this, or at least simplified it as you did. So then!!!!!!!! "Light" is frozen and the only way it can "transform into heat" is through obsorbtion through a medium or gas??? "Note: particles act as little magnets too." Now if light is frozen: what is time and where did it emerge? Hmmmm.. Is this related to permeability?? What im getting at is that it would appear "light" is frozen or ionic, predictable in a sense through geometry, ie hexagonal topologies, homogeneous, triangulated etc etc.. Is this anology correct?

If x^2 = x/x = 1, why does 1 depend on 2 input values??? I get this idea from y' = 2x What if an input value was 3, does that make x cubed?????? y' =x^3 I'm totally confused..

In my opinion, I think "time' itself is contracted, becuase length is a "variable."...Why else would light bend towards the normal?? If light is slowing down in denser mediums "What" causes re-transmission of light? The medium "field" itself? And is the speed of re-transmission proportional to its slowing down speed? Meaning that does re-transmission of light travel slow in mediums too????