TonyMcC

I may be wrong, but you seem to be trying to produce answers which are not necessarily absolutely true or false, but have a likelihood of being true or false. This seems to be an attempt to produce results similar to those produced by fuzzy logic. Layers with two states only have been described in the past. "In fuzzy set theory, classical bivalent sets are usually called crisp sets." to quote from your link.

The attachment has been copied from link:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_visualization

It seems to me that you are describing fuzzy logic. If so it isn't really that new.

The very first experiment I did in school physics was separating salt from sand. We added enough warm water to completely dissolve the salt. we then filtered out the salt solution and then heated the solution until all the water had evaporated. It worked quite well although the wet sand would have been left a bit salty and the dry salt wasn't pristine - presumably because a little very fine sand got through the filter paper. I felt the experiment was successful and so I don't understand your question.

This reminds me of another puzzle that is (also?) impossible to solve concerning the bridges of Konigsberg :- http://www.jimloy.com/puzz/konigs.htm

For the second part it is important to note that most significant digit is 0. Thus your largest positive number is 01111111 in binary. In decimal (counting right to left as usual) you have 1+2+4+8+16+32+64=127 For 3rd part I can't really explain better than my attachment which is cribbed from the link :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two's_complement

I'm a bit rusty on this kind of thing and will need to brush up two's complement. However your first question is straightforward. Your largest unsigned binary number is 11111111111 This, in decimal, is 1+2+4+8+16+32+64+128+256+512+1024=2047

I think there may be a misprint in the original question. First let me say I have not worked it through completely. However it looks to me as if there would be more chance of proving EP/TP= PR/TS. I say this because triangle QRS is isosceles making QR=SR. Since QS is the median 0n TR, TS=SR=QR. Thus, it seems to me, that the objective might be prove EP/TP= PR/TS (TS being equal to QR). I don't think it is necessary for EP to be perpendicular to RT.

In decimal notation the numbers following the point are in tenths, hundredths, thousandths, etc. In binary they are halves, quarters, eighths, etc. . In case this is homework, say what this method gives you for your answers.

Just a small amount of gold can have a large beneficial effect on both the female and male mind and body if fashioned into a ring! I have a couple of children which is evidence of that!

You will find that the course syllabus will be very wide ranging. To get an idea of what you can expect to study you can use my link. I attach a copy of the relevant part from the link. http://kudos.voidstar.org.uk/admissions/index.php

I think everybody in the world except you and me are at least a little mad - and I'm not too sure about you!

I would not like to run my laptop without a battery and connected to the mains because a sudden mains failure would not let the computer shut down properly. This could cause all sorts of problems with corrupt data (IMO).

I think the strength of the magnetic field does not depend on the length of the conductor. Of course the field extends along the length of the conductor but whether you can say that a longer conductor has "more" magnetism than a shorter conductor I rather doubt. I suppose it rather depends on what is meant by "factors" and how you want to describe the magnetic field. http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/1997spring/phy232/lectures/ampereslaw/wire.html

Hint - If the string is fixed at the ends, then when you sketch a waveform these are points which cannot move.

I was surprised when I heard that the moon is increasing its distance from the earth by more than 3cm per year. The link sets out to explain why. http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=124

Sometimes the rust forms under the paint because the corrosion started on the inside surface and has actually penetrated the metal allowing moisture and air to work under the paint.

There seems to be something rather sad about this thread. I have been married for over 50 years. Our relationship was built at first on mutual attraction and then developed into mutual respect leading to a shared life. If we are honest, part of the initial attraction between us was due to the fact that we deliberately, and quite naturally, tried to match the expected stereo-types. I was more than a little brash and arrogant with a tendency to ride my motorbike at higher speeds than were sensible. She could flutter her eyes, say a lot with just a smile and be helpless enough to seek my advice over quite simple matters. To this day I behave toward her in ways that were considered good manners in my time. She is pleased when I do things like hold a door open for her, help her on with her coat, carry the shopping and walk on the outside of a pavement. I imagine some of the young people in this thread will read this and be horrified. All I can say is that for us it has worked and continues to work!

To be blunt - if you can be confused by your own rules then I think you may start some sort of riot!

Unfortunately this will only take you so far. The Wheatstone Bridge is usually considered to have a galvanometer in place of R5. A Galvanometer is an instrument which can detect very small currents. Circuit resistor values are adjusted with the sole aim of getting zero current through the galvanometer. This indicates the circuit is balanced. Under balanced conditions voltages VA and VB could be calculated from basic principles as the galvanometer could be completely ignored. As soon as the galvanometer is replaced by a resistor and the circuit examined under unbalanced conditions things get much more complicated. http://www.hallikainen.org/rw/theory/theory6.html

R5 makes it a loaded bridge. Ratios of the other resistors will determine whether the loaded bridge is balanced. If unbalanced, you need to use quite a complicated bit of circuit theory. There are quite a few different ways to tackle the unbalanced loaded bridge. e.g Thevenin, superposition or a set of Kirchoff equations.

What you have here is known as a loaded, probably unbalanced, bridge circuit. You will find a lot of information in this link . http://www.hallikainen.org/rw/theory/theory6.html

It would seem that artificial honey is big business in many parts of the world. http://www.alibaba.com/suppliers/artificial-honey-supplier.html

Any test equipment you use may need to be regularly calibrated by an officially accredited external laboratory or the equipment manufacturers according to a strict routine - particularly so if you are doing work for the government or armed forces.

Look at it this way :- When the switch is open you can consider the two parts as separate circuits connected to the 12V supply. f you make the calculations you should be able to satisfy yourself that the voltage at the junction of the two resistors is 8V and the voltage at the junction of the two capacitors is 4V. In the instant you close the switch the two junctions are connected together. This means they must be at the same voltage. Firstly, this voltage drops to 4V because the charge held by a capacitor cannot change instantaneously. As time carries on the voltage will rise exponentially to 8V as the charges on the capacitors change. Therefore after a period of time the circuit stabilises with the charges held by the capacitors having changed and the voltage at the junction being 8V. Hope this helps.