caharris

While I agree that there are limitations, the distances of 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16... are still crossed regardless of whether we can measure them in practice. If I move my hand a specific distance, I still cross every infinite fraction even though I couldn't get out a ruler and measure it.

Added. Thanks for the suggestions.

There are no examples of actual infinities? Divide the distance between one centimeter to another centimeter over and over again. Wouldn't you be able to do this for infinity? If you have another option that you think I should add let me know.

I was discussing the details of what it meant to say that time was infinite, specifically into the past. The main objection that I got was that "if the past is infinite, then it would have taken an infinite of time to reach the present." My first impulse is to say "So?" and ignore it, but I was having difficulty explaining why that didn't bother me. So I'm curious as to what you guys think. Could time extend infinitely into the past? If so, what would that mean? If not, why?

Oh, I thought that the "each" was just there to throw me off...

1) Find each exact value of sin(x+y) if sin x=[math] \frac{3}{5}[/math] and sin y= [math] \frac{12}{37}[/math] I used the sin(x+y)=(sin x)(cos y)+(cos x)(sin y) formula, [math] \frac{3}{5} * \frac{35}{37} + \frac{4}{5}*\frac{12}{37}[/math] and got [math] \frac{153}{185}[/math] as a final answer. I'm second guessing my work because the answer doesn't seem like something my teacher would give. 2) How would I go about finding the ArcTan of 3? I know it's 71deg-ish, but I don't know how they got that... (Sorry about all the edits for this part of the post.) There might be more, I'm done with fifteen out of twenty problems. Thank you all for your help!

I told her I didn't think she was correct, but I promised to ask. Thanks for the info

A friend asked me a question that I didn't know the answer to, so I thought I'd ask you all. "What if dark matter is the product of matter-antimatter interaction in the early universe?" Any information would be appreciated.

Got it, thank you for your help

"John is 1.5m tall and throws an orange at a velocity of 15m/s. It just barely clears a 5m tall wall at the peak of its trajectory. At what angle did he throw the ball? How far away is John from the wall?" So pretty much, the only thing I can't remember is how to find Vx and Vy. (To get the angle.) I know I have to break V down into components to find the angle, and I know V will be the hypotenuse of the triangle used to find the angle. Would I just use formulas to find Vf to find Vy (If I remember correctly, V is also Vx to begin with)? All I need is to know whether you find Vf to get Vy, I have the formulas for that. Thank you for your help.

Didn't Hawking study black holes because he thought the singularity (mathematically) matched that of the big bang? And didn't Hawking and Penrose (the guys who mathematically "made" the singularity) reject the idea later?

A little past half-way down, in a section called "In the Beginning," talking about the anthropic coincidences by Victor Stenger

So, I sort of jumped the gun when I started reading up on closed timelike curves (CTC), and while I think I understand the concept, I was wondering if anyone could give me a sort of crash course on CTC. I found a good number of papers about it from just this year, and I know that Hawking mentioned it before, but a lot of it just went over my head. Thank you all for your help in advance. Also, here are some of the papers that I had downloaded. Maybe someone can read one and give me a simplified version of it. Closed timelike curves via post-selection - theory and experimental demonstartion.pdf Revisiting consistency conditions for quantum states of systems on closed timelike curves - an epistemic perspective.pdf Quantum mechanics of time travel through post-selected teleportation.pdf

Lol I know (good ol' six days), and (I don't know about every translation) it even says "...there was light... then he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day and the darkness night. Together these made up one day" paraphrased Genesis1:3-5 NLT But both of us know, the religious will jump on his idea like a starving lion. But I'm really quite interested if the problem works out...

Ehhhh... Can you dumb that down for me?

Basically, my christian friend gave me a religious/science book (because I'm a terrible atheist, ya know ) called "The Science of God" where he tries to show that if you look at the creation of the universe from a point in the big bang that it appears to have lasted six days, while on Earth it will have been 15 billion years. [MATH]\frac{15 billion}{10^{12}}[/MATH] : [MATH]\frac{x*365}{1}[/MATH] It is a ratio showing the 15 billion year old earth (I thought it was 13.7 billion years?) over the temperature at the end of the particle era ([MATH]10^{12}[/MATH] k, the whole thing started at [MATH]10^{15}[/MATH] k though). X*365 turns out to equal 5.47 days. His reasoning for starting in the particle era was because radiant energy "doesn't experience the flow of time," and "Time truly takes hold when matter forms." Are these two statements correct? He claims that the singularity of the big bang is a proven fact (which, if I understood correctly, it isn't), so just to humor his assertion, wouldn't time still start with the singularity? It's been brought to my attention that this could possibly be numerology, but I'd thought I'd get everyone else' opinion as well.

Are you talking about Hawking's information paradox? I thought he finally said that was wrong?

Thank you, I will check that thread out. I didn't know what it was called

Thank you for the explanation As far as when I said "degrading", I was referring to what you had put in your first response. Even as someone who's accepted evolution, this fills in some gaps of my (limited) knowledge.

So, are there any species today, or any that have been completely have gotten and haven't become too degraded that have different numbers? Or do all species have the same amount?

Someone told me that evolution would show that the amount of genes would have changed the farther we go back, and that no one had proved it. Do genes change in size or amount the farther we go back? And if so, is there proof of this, or is it an indirect observation? I know that they occasionally mutate, but his point was the size changes.

Okay that makes sense. Thank you for explaining it to me

I was actually watching a TV program with Brian Greene (the string theorist) who was talking about this. But that aside, for the self-energized electron you mentioned, is the singularity that is proposed for the bb the original source for the energy, or is the electron itself considered to be a sort of singularity? Or was that a really stupid question?

That is true, I don't know too much about either, though I do read both physics papers and neuroscience papers almost all day. I have always wondered the specifics about how people go about doing the research (especially the math involved).

I hadn't thought of taking science classes as electives at college. That may very well be something that I look into. I'm friends with the head of the science department at a local college (KSU) and they've apparently gotten better science resources in recent years, but he's been in China for a while so I haven't been able to speak to him about it. You mentioned, Genecks, double majoring. Since neuroscience is one of my interests and you've already taken quite a few classes for it, would you say that they were, not necessarily too difficult, but very time consuming? I'd hate to half-a$$ a degree just because I couldn't make a decision... To answer your questions, in five or so years (I would be almost 23) I imagine myself working on the next higher-up degree for whatever path I had chosen. If I chose neuroscience, I'd probably work with either neuro-genesis, or consciousness/behaviors. If I took a comological path, I would probably end up working on the relevance of m-theory to certain things.