NTuft

Daddy's mummy and daddy's mummies.

At the 5th dimensional to 10th or 26th silly string standard model let's say the set of square roots of prime numbers, positive and negative, exists as part of all algebras and geometry. At 4th dimensional derivative level we have a 1/2 Kinetic Energy term, which is complex (time-dependent) because of the need to accrue momentum At 3rd dimensional derivative level we have a -1/4 Potential Energy term, and we want to restrict Potential Energy interactions to 3-D models for electrostatics At 2nd dimensional level we have a 3/8 term, normally omitted from the Kinetic Energy terms; we'll call it the gravitational interaction at 2-D level: like basic former electrostatics. At 1st string we have 15/16 = planck length of some kind => extension implicit in the string stretch or whatever @StringJunky

Egads man.. Oh, well. Dam up the river build a smokehouse and start a farm. Maybe some other more formalized manner? Or if you're remote viewing and I have parasites send me a P.M.

Here's yours for the day. Sounds like imaginary values. Evo-psych? Agreed. Damage control by both parties and grist for the media mill, here we are cleaning up a mess. Lessons for gleaners. "Consistently give a shit" At least one per day. We are legion

@exchemist, Of course we know 6. A box and two? Nucleons paired by exclusion (proto-neutro), but some such at vertices pi, or on elliptic interior. To a ring of course 66 and any of our iterations of C O N H; like sugar. Yee-haw, saddle up. Seriously, something at the vertices of the solids.

i is dissociating and plane full of other passengers.

Hi @uncool, I've got a few pages from yesteryear on that Taylor/Maclaurian(sic) series. Is it because it's a summation(or integral) of the rectangular hyperbola 1 that you say the Taylor series (McLaurin centered at 0) series is justification of the original equation? I think also, by an inversion of some sort, falls down or up on a hyperbola? Or did these guys figure it out from series/sums beforehand somehow.. I will look to read at above reference some more. Do you have any other thoughts?? 1WolframAlpha: y=(1/x) (ty)

control is... a far aim.

Punctuations to be accounted for, then? I'll try to work on assumptions. Also I should probably read at least one of the books I recommended. Or this whole topic, for starters.

Consider getting both Darwin's Black Box by Behe, and Darwin and the Barnacle by Scott. Anyone want to chime in on whether Gradualism is fact over Catastrophism? Soft-bodied animals from the Cambrian era? A lithium-boron bolide from outerspace? Not to mention that iridium one later on.

"They can never take away your education." "...you're going to end up digging a ditch somewhere." -Ggma

It is my opinion that there are four.

I'm actually quoting myself there from my notes. I will have to re-source the paper, but it was on the Shpenkov wave equation and was written by a Victor Christianto, a researcher from the Phillipines, IIRC. I'm aiming for intellectual honesty but I know that's not always realistic. From the start of Ch. 8, Approximation Methods, in McQuarrie's Quantum Chemistry (after introducing Douglas Hartree and Vladimir Fock): appendix on hyperbolic math: As a particular conic, the hyperbola can be parametrized by the process of addition of points on a conic. Sourced from HandWiki reference manual: Topic::sub-topic

Please allow me to leave the elegance to the Tailor (L.B.) The quantum harmonic oscillator on the sphere and the hyperbolic plane: 𝜅-dependent formalism, polar coordinates, and hypergeometric functions J. Math. Phys. 48, 102106 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2795214 José F. Cariñenaa) and Manuel F. Rañadab) Departmento de Física Teórica, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Mariano Santanderc) Departamento de Física Teórica, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain I cannot access this paper yet except for the abstract. Perhaps not an authoritative source, but: I do not know of those two operators specifically. However, the Schrödinger equation as adapted by the Born probability interpretation and modified by operators , seems to break down in explanatory power when we generalize the 1-D(particle in a box)->2-D(Hooke spring) harmonic oscillator further. "5.4 The Harmonic Oscillator Approximation Results from the Expansion of an Internuclear Potential Around Its Minimum". What I'd call Fourier transformations for analysis or modelling are useful for approximating the simple harmonic oscillator to a higher dimensional space or reducing space/time functions to vibrational spectra. For improved accuracy anharmonic correction is added from my limited reading.. However, mathematicaly, the virial theorem does not hold even for the simplest di-atomic molecule, and so corrections have to be made, and it is accepted as a way of making approximations. Why? Because we do think we have a handle on molecular orbitals... I concur. These are very much spherical harmonic oscillator solutions apparently -- as exemplifying the tendency toward lowest energy configurations they are our basis for modelling Q.M. on 4 quantum numbers -- but again, "the spherical solution of Schrödinger equation does not agree w/any experiment".. So there is a gap in the explanatory power. Q.M. interpretations need to account for wave-particle duality, uncertainty(I'm not sure), and quantization, but I don't think it has to be as 'nebulous' as what the probabilistic interpretation leads to (chop up the Copenhagen interpretation). It makes sense to me that squaring the Psi modulus in the wave-function removes a complex-valued part of the azimuthal function; removing this discontinuity makes the probabilistic distribution of a 1-D oscillator extensible as probabilistic interpretations of position in space or momentum in higher dimension space by extending the wave-propagation along a string (sinusoidal) to higher dimension (string theory..). i think we need a complex-valued 2-D or 3-D harmonic oscillator reverse engineered from molecular orbitals, and it likely needs to use hyperbolic geometry and trigonometry. Euclidean geometric extension from 1-D oscillator to map 'spheres' via Fourier analysis (limited understanding) may have a wrong assumption. If "bonding+anti-bonding" orbital maps can be represented with hyperbolic mathematics that may mean something. It may be more like positive or negative roots, solutions to a quadratic equation. It may mean the space-time has curvature and it's indeterminate as to why (i.e. we deduce the curvature is present from the models that work and can now geometer) as in we don't have to resort to presume there is a pervasive gravity field... ----- using WolframAlpha: The f(x) appears to be an odd function: maps from (+,+)Q1->(-,+)Q4 on reflection across Y. However, when I add in the complex graph (and it looks like a hyperbola), WA throws it over to quadrant 3 (-,-)[reflection across y=-x] which seems equivalent to Q1(+,+) in my mind. Anyway, not sure it's even valid when it wants to do a complex number there. I'd like it to be a complex graph but I haven't figured how to get that done. f'(x) appears odd as well: maps from Q2(+,-)->Q3(-,-): when I add in the complex on WA it mirrors it across the y-axis to Q3. however, the derivative of an odd function is even, and the derivative of an even function is odd. So one is odd and one is even, or neither is... Both converge as a limit towards 0. If anyone can tell me anything about these things to characterize them, I'd appreciate it. Thank you

from handwiki reference. quoting/paraphrasing here: "Transitions between harmonic-oscillator states can occur only between adjacent levels -- a selection rule. We shall show... that if a harmonic oscillator is irradiated with electromagnetic radiation propagating in the z direction, then the probability that the oscillator makes a transition from state to ' is proportional to the square of the integral where is the z component of the dipole moment. This type of integral, which occurs frequently in spectroscopy, is called a dipole transition moment. ... the selection rule for vibrational transitions under the harmonic-oscillator approximation... normal modes... infrared active... infrared inactive."1 1McQuarrie, Donald A. (Donald Allan). Quantum Chemisty. 2nd ed., University Science Books, 2008. pgs. 237-238 2Attached pgs. 138-139 from 1 on Newton's equations (calculus), gradient operator, level curves, equipotential lines, Fick's law of diffusion, Fourier's law of heat flow, mechanical potential energy, electrostatic potential. I think this argues is exchemist's favor; those level curves look like they direct the work; I don't understand energy well or walls properly, , or

My chemicals and enzymes and much more nuts and Boltz, mann, than yourzz... Your perspective, knowledge and understanding is appreciated. I think I can understand what you're saying about Energy as descriptive merely system-wide? I don't think we're too off base, as I think an enzyme kinetics graph is literally plotting against "reaction progress". Also plotted is E + S ... E + P or some such business.

Judging by displacement wrought by the chemical reaction mechanism, it is doing work by applying force over time: "In physics, work is the energy transferred to or from an object via the application of force along a displacement." See biophysical chemistry, e.g.: "A ribosome is a biological machine that utilizes protein dynamics on nanoscales to translate RNA into proteins"

"In general, modern physics holds the view that the universe - and systems therein - spontaneously drives toward a state of lower energy, if possible." When an enzyme is directing alterations, do you conceive the energy involved as a nebulous statement on the system? I would argue that the work is very specifically directed and also can be localized in space, and while directed by net energetic concerns of the system the specificity of the alterations and requisite structural demands again speak towards directionality buried in the conventions.

addenda: 4 pages of maths Please address helical (4-or-more parts of quantum numbers quantized by) boundary conditions and conic section mapping around hyperbolic complex plane, a la atomic and molecular orbitals comprising discrete and oppositely possible 4 vector translations and spin 1/2-integer states (i.e. discrete locations dictated in space to carve a sphere while maintaining +1/2 or -1/2 spin on either half ; divisions of n/7, with n= 1-7: .857142... sphere carving around central "complex cone" or center of gravity, C.o.G ). Find bounds for elliptical asymptote through quadratic roots with hyperbolic trigonometry scaling sinh and cosh as averages of natural exponentiation; apply to other harmonic functions making use of natural logs. 5-7-22-6-1-22.pdf

Is the crystallograhy for unique? Why is it saddle conformer shaped, is it related to diagonality on the periodic table as silicon relates to boron?

I may have misunderstood: the link to the un-vetted reference manual qualifies angular momentum or velocity as a pseudovector, but torque is a time derivative of the angular momentum or velocity??? Likely 2nd deriv of momentum and 1st deriv of velocity? I like to pretend the quartz crystal in my watch has an AC Josephson junction running it, but, it has stopped, and who am I kidding. It is almost Dada's day in the U.S.; happy belated St. Joseph's Day to those in Europe. The question at hand is, "Power?", but capiert has gone AWOL. We have to extensively formulate all of classical physics first, and then teach capiert calculus, joigus; so no rest 'til then. What is the math in the background of your profile?!? Is /(P)/ for Power? Please define equations here. U or V for voltage... Power is also , torque x angular velocity . M L T If you could explain the stress-energy-momentum tensor to @icarus2 you can save him from most recent "imaginary" gravity madness, but I think you did try in his gravitational self-energy thread. All these power units seem to include , I don't know if we're walking down to Planck units for gravity but they're there, too. To get to 4D Minkowski space we've appended our "imaginary" friend in the Lorentz transformations to the time component, making the time dimension complex compared to the spatial. The ubiquity of the "imaginary" here, and in the Fourier transformations (from complex valued functions) we're doing in astrophysics when measuring vibration have our friend icarus2 confounded on the physical groundedness of the "imaginary" time, or otherwise complex (e.g. it's used in the quantum momentum operator -- is that because momentum has to be gained in time, or why?) values that are possible (so far off-topic here we may need a moderator). Thanks from me for mentioning s-e-m tensor, and to other mentions of worthwhile topics on the matter at hand. @exchemist, I take one swig from the jug of methylene blue as punishment for losing the point. But i maintain energy directs work.

Mr. Anthrobalanus has filed a counter-suit, and hired one B.B.M. as his attorney. Various famous Ascidiae spp. are expected to give testimony. I will perhaps have to examine this precident in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. These cases could be on par with the Scopes Monkey Trial. Q:"who created god?" A:"The Anglican trinity, of course: Mrs. Spencer, Mrs. Darwin, and Mrs. Galton." Here's to your English mother. Mine is Welsh. Well, my best attempt at a testable hypothesis is to possibly insult the reepr's Stonehouse mother. So I apologize now. Best TA ever, lessons on hand, no doubt. -- @Moontanman I don't mean any offense... "/You can't get a suntan on the moon /They say, you can't get a suntan on the moon /Thank you, Mister President, for my holiday, Sir". YouTube: Puscifer - Holiday on the Moon And Howdy out to you in South Carolina. Don't know if you're English.

And so you are modelling a system that has no physical importance or corollary, it seems. This is an erroneous statement on my part. In particular, I found mention of something like "runaway pair", or "breakaway pair", but I cannot find the correct term now -- it was specifically a pair moving on parallel lines with force interactions offset to maintain distance -- so perhaps someone can fill in that blank; @joigus. It's likely there are other paired systems I'm not aware of that make my statement false. This also seems relevent, regarding a free particle: uncertainty.pdf 1 So I say that it may be imprecise to make the assumption that you can determine that the particles are both on parallel lines (determining position) and moving with constant speed (or, the kinetic energy or momentum they gained in getting up to speed; determining momentum). It's neither "tradition" nor "brainwashing" It has a very sound basis (time translation symmetry) and protocols on how to apply it. If you ignore those protocols, of course, you get the wrong answer. We don't kick things out because a few people fail to understand them. @Capiert can you elaborate on time translation symmetry, as swansont introduced to give reference to your formulations, and if that is somehow requisite in your formulation which I would now phrase as: Conservation Of Energy (COE) is fake by some kind of classical derivations relating to Power. Is that a correct phrasing for your argument? Perhaps @exchemist knows about this time translation symmetry business as his question is formulated with odd spacing as you employ. I hope my egregious use of parentheses (as is my custom) is similarly well met. Here also (the second half of the page is) on Work as a dot product: 1.pdf 1 @swansont: 2.pdf1 Since, "Torque can be defined as the rate of change of angular momentum, analogous to force."2, I think we have to settle on it being a pseudovector (which is news to me). I may not understand fully but the reference .pdf specifically qualifies it as a cross product, not dot product. @exchemist Here is another page on this section about vectors (forgive me, but it brings in HCl which you mentioned specifically in the London Dispersion/Van der Waals forces thread, so I include it here for our point of contention): 3.pdf So, to the point: if we have a separated pair of opposite point charges there should be potential energy between (yes?), and the directionality again (like with the joule) is built into the notion of the dipole here with energy going from negative to positive by convention. You could be right, maybe energy has no directionality, but in a system where it dissipates I imagine it goes outward radially, and in a system where energy is transferred otherwise I most always seem to imagine it has directionality (but it is often built into the units or conventions under consideration). 1McQuarrie, Donald A. (Donald Allan). Quantum Chemisty. 2nd ed., University Science Books, 2008. 2Handwiki.org : Physics:Angular momentum

Point ceded: I may have overgeneralized the topic when I edited gender out of the question. The question as posed of course is engendered and has direction (female->male abuse), and so broader implications include gender issue more generally. However, to an outside observer, bringing in a specific issue often equated as part of PC woke culture (transgender inclusiveness) and then turning to decry another party for doing the same seems like the hogwash: you want to include your specific topic, but decry the trend in general? I'm pointing out the obvious, but I read @Peterkin to be dividing the causality from party A (AH) -> party B (JD) along with the issue which was actually decided in court. Party A was found to have defamed party B (A->B) alluding to sexual violence/domestic abuse, and party B's atty's defamed A (B->A) with what I infer are false allegation. @koti's question however implies A->B as a "victim of abuse" (i.e. the reverse of what was implied by the defamatory statements re: B->A abuse) , which I don't think was being examined in the case unless you include defamation as abuse. @koti seems to want to equate party B's statement about getting is life back with an evidentiary finding of A->B domestic abuse, when the issue was defamation claiming B->A abuse. @iNowThis is why I quoted what I did from you earlier -- you'd identified that you were engaging with an irrational actor. You should know when doing it that you can sharpen your own skills, but not likely reach any rational end; otherwise, do not engage. I do not know this person, but I have seen a similar script elsewhere where such methods are used intentionally. The M.O. with emotional brittleness, illogicality, and violent undertone is employed as a method. @kotiimplied he may have been injured personally in a relationship, so that could be the cause. But the ongoing illogicality combined with lashing out bespeaks some kind of assignment or agenda being carried on, in my opinion. +1 to CharonY at the top of this page for hard details.