mooeypoo

I'm going to look up the examples, I can't remember them now, but there were a few where squaring the equation was the wrong thing to do, because it yielded two solutions rather than one, which meant we need to verify which is the right one later.

Right, also we deal with numbers here and not variables.. hm. Okay, so the ambiguous part would be asking to square something like [math]x=\sqrt{y+3}[/math] that has variables? I'm a bit confused, now. When do we gain/lose signs and should be careful of squaring the roots?

You need to re-read your own bible. How is it now a part of some aspects of Christianity, when the majority of Christians (and if we're talking about Rome, let's talk about Catholics -- who are included in this statement) are VEHEMENTLY opposing anything and everything even remotely related to homosexuality? You need to go over history, your own bible, and the cultural background of the Roman people, the Greeks, and those who lived next to them. The Roman had absolutely NO PROBLEMS with homosexuality, they were a very openly-sexual people, and they took that from the greek. This *DID* happen 1000 years ago, and yet the church did not "become more gay". It seems your knowledge of history is flawed, which makes it unsurprising that your conclusions of how things would look are unsupported. pioneer, your depiction of the history of the church and of Rome is blatantly simplified, false and lacking. You're preaching that people should read the New Testament and look at history when you are CLEARLY not doing either. This is ridiculous. It's like arguing with someone that the bricks in the wall are liquid. Get your facts straight, pioneer. ~moo

Well, regardless of anything, sex should be enjoyed and practiced safely.

I don't mean to confuse here, but I was always under the impression that tricks like these are problematic. When you square the x, solve and then find the sqrt, you gain signs (+/-). It might be a problem for the "more advanced" but whenever we do something like that in physics or math, we end up with an absolute value. I was always told to avoid doing that.....?

Vindhya, we would love to help, but we don't want to just give you the answer (that's not help). Here's a tip, see if that helps your kid continue: You start with this expression: [math]\sqrt{8+2\sqrt{7}}+\sqrt{8-2\sqrt{7}}[/math] Ignore, for a moment, the "scary" square root that covers both main parts. What if this looked like this: [math](8+2\sqrt{7})[/math] and [math](8-2\sqrt{7})[/math] The first thing that pops to me, as a start, is that both expressions have a 2 multiplying the second part (the square root inside). It would be nice if I could find a way to multiply the first part of each expression by 2, so I can have a common multiplier I can then take outside... Like this: [math](2(4)-2\sqrt{7})[/math] Don't be afraid of square roots, they just group the elements together. Now that you see how to stat, you can bring back the square root again: [math]\sqrt{2(4)-2\sqrt{7}}[/math] Can you do the same for the other part and try to continue from here?

Hm, I thought about this and I think I remember a few examples now of this done. Namely, when we wanted to get "tricks" of completing a square in a fractions' denominator, by multiplying it by its conjugate divided by the conjugate (hence, 1). So, yeah, I take it back. I do have another issue with this though. Even if 0^0 was defined -- the division by 0(to the power of whatever) is undefined on its own. Yielding "infinity". Is that 'step' mathematically legal, D H ?

Since you're asking for a "logical argument" (the above posts are supplying enough, but just for the sake of an 'exercise'), here's an idea: Ask your friend to walk naked to the beach and expose herself totally naked at her dorm to anyone who wants to see her. I assume she will tell you that's unacceptable, in which case you can ask -- why? Why are you so uptight, friend? there are many people out there who view nudity as a form of freeing yourself. Our social habit of covering our bodies with cloths is just that -- a social view, and if you get rid of it, you'll be FREE! you will! Do it! See the lack of logic here? Her body is hers, and exposing herself is an intimate act that shouldn't be taken lightly. Some people might consider it just fine, and that's okay for them, I have no problem with that, but I wouldn't do that. I don't feel comfortable with it, and it's not because I feel bad in my own body, it's because that's my limit in my own intimacy. Having sex is yours. It used to be mine, too. I'm 28 now, and I have been in your shoes, as i said before. You're not alone, you are not the only woman who does not feel comfortable having sex with just anyone, and/or who didn't find that someone before the age of 18. Don't give up, and stand up for your values and your limits. It's your body, and just like people draw the line in nudity, you draw the line in sharing your intimacy with a person you trust. Trust me, when that time comes, and you have intimate relations (not just mechanical 'sex') with someone you trust, it will be much more enjoyable, much more intimate and much more memorable than if you just go out and do it out of peer pressure. ~moo

Moved to homework help. Prasad, how would you start this equation? We're not going to solve it for you, but we can help you solve it yourself. Do you have any idea on how to start? Try to look for common numbers in these groups.

Moved to homework help. Prasad, how would you start this equation? We're not going to solve it for you, but we can help you solve it yourself. Do you have any idea on how to start? Try to look for common numbers in these groups.

Also, you can't multiply only one side without changing the meaning of the equation and making it a non equality. So even if you treat the 0^0 as a variable/number, your second step should be [math]0^0*1=0^0*1[/math] And so: [math]\frac{0^0}{0^0}*1=\frac{0^0}{0^0}*1[/math] Divide both sides by 0^0 [math]0^0*1=0^0*1[/math] Simplify using the division laws of exponents -- and go back to your first step. Hence, this exercise didn't really help much. Moreover, when you divide both sides by 0^0 in your third step, you arbitrarily decide that 0^0/0^0 on the right side is 1 (it disappears) but on the left side it doesn't. You need to be consistent. ~moo

Belief is irrelevant, we are a science forum, not a mythology one. The guess was nice, the definition is quite simply false.

It might be hard, but if you DON'T go out there, it's impossible.

I don't think it's a hidden agenda, it's just this weird concept some people have that if you have sex, you'll suddenly see how freeing it is... bla bla blaaaaaa bla bla. TOTALLY wrong. As a woman who had sex relatively late (according to 'society'), I can tell you honestly: Do not get yourself into a situation where your intimacy is not controlled by YOU. Sex isn't just a mechanical act, it's an intimate act. Some people don't think that, and all health to them, but that doesn't mean that it should be treated as this nonissue that should just be 'done with'. Take your time in your own pace, don't let anyone tell you when you're ready. I've been there. I know what it's like. Get yourself into places where you have opportunities to meet more people so this one single friend isn't your only one; you're in a college environment (or university), so you should be able to find that. Find a community of people who accept you as a friend, and don't give you such ridiculously stupid advice as the one above. ~moo

Google is your friend. It's not the exam's friend, though.

So what you're saying, really, is that the Gauls are barbarians without culture, weak and stupid (they're the opposite of Rome, who's smart, strong and cultured) and same goes with the rest of the huge and diverse cultures -- many of them quite old and intriguing -- that were eventually crushed by the violence of Christian Rome? More than being quite an annoying misrepresentation of history with a vast simplification, it is also quite snobbish and pretentious. The fact Christianity *won*, doesn't make it better. It just makes it the winner. If your concept is that 'might makes right', that's fine, but if that's the case, I challenge your view of morality. ~moo

If it wasn't clear, this is against our rules. amtrak, I don't see why you wouldn't want to save your 20 dollars and plug each and every question into google, which is what I am going to do for you for pay. We'd love to comply with the rules of the forum and help you; just so you know, we usually delete those posts for spam. We really want to help, so I left this post as-is, but please stop requesting people disobey our rules. ~moo

To say that this is an oversimplification of the history of christianity would be an oversimplification of the statement. The history of Christianity is much more political than that, involves Constantine giving the religion much more political power than he probably intended to, and weakening the other religions through that process, etc etc etc. Making a conclusion (that history repeats itself) based on simplified view of history without taking into account some of the *MAJOR* influences and politics that went on in there will only yield faulty conclusion. Confirmation bias is very comfortable, but it's not logic. Nitpicking through history isn't logic either. I recommed you get into the REAL history of the Christian church, it's relationship with Rome (good and bad) and its influence on the murders and killings of thousands of non-Christians in the Crusades. The christian church didn't "help transform" so-called "backward" barbarians, it FORCED the religion on these cultures. Quite frankly, I wouldn't judge who the 'backward barbarian' is too quickly, in that period of time, considering what was done. ~moo

Well, reading the article: The team also concluded that the existence of vast quantities of invisible dark matter is the best way of explaining the motions of galaxies. The work also suggests that dark energy, in the form of a cosmological constant, is the best way of understanding how the universe is expanding. And also: One ADSD is related to how light from very distant galaxies is distorted by the gravitational fields of other galaxies that it passes on its way to Earth – an effect predicted by general relativity and called gravitational lensing. The second quantity is related to the velocities of the galaxies. The beauty of the new test is that both quantities are susceptible to bias – but the effects cancel in the ratio. Quite interesting, if one just reads through it.

#2 sounds like a light particle-wave, if only it wouldn't have started with "minute body of mass", seeing as photons have no mass. Is it a mistake in the definition, or did I get it wrong? Not sure I understand what you mean, but I can edit posts, if you need me to, while I'm online. Sure, I combined the threads.

amtrak, two things: 1. Seriously and honestly, it would defy the point. Your son can get these answers online with a simple google search. That will not help him succeed in the upcoming exam. 2. That is slightly against our rules. We do not 'spoon-feed' answers; the answers are available online, we're here to help people make sense of *how* to solve them, how to look for them, and how to deal with them. If you're pressed for time, save your money (*really*, you don't need to pay for this, it's a google search away), and sit with your son (or without) and look the answers up on google. Within 20 minutes, you'll have all the answers. The first step to making sure he succeeds in the actual exam, though (where the questions will be different, and so he will need to know how to solve them and not just spit out the answers to this sheet), is to make sure he *understands* them. Kids with ADD have problems concentrating and sitting still, but they're smart. He can do it, it's just a matter of sitting down and trying, finding the ways that help him handle it. We can help, but giving you final answers is not help (and it's not something we do). You're welcome to stay and have us help out. There is always someone to answer questions, and your son can start by asking the firt few questions he got stuck on *today* so he can get answers before the end of the weekend. ~moo

Robert, as much as many of us would appreciate a pay, we would much rather walk your son through the exercises through the forum. It will also help him understand the material better. We do this a lot in our homework section, and you can think of it as a sort of tutoring with no pay. We aren't here 24/7, so answers might take longer than with an "instant" tutor, but we do help out, specially when we see the student trying to solve things for themselves. Try to be a bit more specific as to where your son struggles with the material, maybe? I know he has ADD and it makes it hard for him to concentrate, but the benefit of a forum is to walk him through it on his pace. He can also join us in the chatroom (click on 'chat' above), though, I must warn, the chatroom is often home to our "idle" members, is more for a 'fun' passing of time. We are there to help but not 24/7 so try not to get frustrated if you don't get immediate answers. Posting through the forum will be much more helpful, and will also comply with our rules. It will likely help your son much more than us solving the problems for him, specially with the lack of a tutor to walk him through the problems using his style of learning. If he just wants to cram the subject, he can look things up online; out of experience (I am tutoring myself, and I have had a student with ADD) this type of cramming isn't enough. The student needs to first understand what he's doing, and then 'cram' as many problems as possible to 'bring it home'. Understanding the stuff is key, though, and that will be best achieved if he just sits down and sees where he gets stuck. Who knows, he might even get a B ~moo

Interestingly enough, that's what believers are saying about Islam too. And Judaism too. And Hinduism. And other types of Christianity. Etc. Etc. Etc. ~moo

Cap'n, that reminds me of a claim skeptics often answer creationists: It's like the case of the pond in a hole in the road. The pond wonders in awe -- "How is it that I fit *perfectly* to the hole I'm in?? I must be designed!". Of course, if the pond would not have fit that hole in the ground, it would be asking a different question. Your question makes no sense in that aspect. Let's say god is not prevented from removing the evil, it just chose not to. We ask 'why' because that's how things are. If evil would not have existed, or if balance was tilted, we'd be asking why there is no balance. The question seems to be tautological, no? ~moo

Notice the terminology, by the way. I share the belief that abortion should be strongly avoided. However, I think it's the right of the woman to decide over her own body as long as the cells are not yet sentient, which is the case for at least the first trimester. That is, while I believe abortion should be avoided and education for safe sex is extremely important, I also think abortion should be legal. And safe. And while I understand your point, I don't see abortion as tragic, I see it as a painful, often degrading process, which should be avoided by practicing safe sex and having a well rounded understanding of health issues that are involved. Since I don't see the fertilized pack of cells as living person, nor do I see them as a "potential person" any more than I see discarded sperm "potential person", I don't see abortion in the first trimester as a moral issue at all. I do think that it should be avoided from the standpoint of the woman and from society in general, as in to have better sex education, but I don't see this as a loss of life. I see it as a loss of cells. Hence, no moral issue here for me. ~moo