Cap'n Refsmmat

urchinTracker is the script name for Google Analytics, which we run to get statistics about SFN's use and popularity.

What different one? Give an example.

It started Tuesday or Wednesday... in August.

There's the substitution method. [math]2x + 4y = 10[/math] [math]2x = y[/math] Your goal is to find x and y. You know that y is the same as 2x because of the second equation, so you can change the first to: [math]2x + (4 \times 2x) = 10[/math] or just [math]2x + 8x = 10[/math] Solve it and you find that x = 1. Now you just take the second equation to find y. It can be more complicated than that -- you may have to solve one equation for y or x to get started -- but substitution works that way in general.

Many things. A polynomial is just a type of equation, so you'd be better off asking what an equation might be used for. Physics, for example, is all about equations. You can predict how fast something will be moving at a certain time, how high it will be, what direction it will be going, etc. and a lot of that uses polynomials such as [math]x = x_0 + v_0t + \frac{1}{2}at^2[/math] and other fun equations.

Ad hominem attacks qualify as logical fallacies. Please do not think that because I have not responded to you we are not looking in to this matter. I understand your points and I am going to try to read the posts in question to see who was right. It would be best if we kept further discussion to PMs.

Yes.

A polynomial is just a fancy name for an equation like [math]h = 3 + 4t - 9.8t^2[/math], which has three ("poly" means many) parts: 3, 4t, and -9.8t2. That equation, by the way, is the equation that could tell you the height of a ball thrown upwards at 4 meters per second from a height of three meters. They can be used for about anything; that's just one example.

Sure. You should know by now about square roots, and how [math]\sqrt{4} = 2[/math] because [math]2^2 = 4[/math]. The trouble occurs when you try to do [math]\sqrt{-4}[/math]. There's nothing that, when squared, will give you negative four. Try it. Take any negative number and multiply it by itself. You'll get a positive number -- but -4 is negative. That's where imaginary numbers come in. It's sometimes useful to take the square root of a negative number, even though there is no actual square root. So we make up a number called [math]i[/math]. To define it the most simply (there are better ways to define it), [math]i = \sqrt{-1}[/math]. Of course, [math]i[/math] doesn't actually exist, so it's imaginary. We just use it because it's helpful, not because it represents something real. So then what's the square root of -4? It's 2i. When you're faced with an equation like this: [math]\sqrt{-16}[/math] you can take the - sign out as an i: [math]i \times \sqrt{16}[/math] which becomes [math]4i[/math] when you take the square root of 16. Complex numbers can also be things like [math]4i + 3[/math] or anything with that goofy letter i in it. Just remember that i represents [math]\sqrt{-1}[/math].

The first one: "There is a unique number 0 with the property that 0+a = a+0 = a" It's simply saying that if you add 0 to any number, you get that number. 4 + 0 = 4. Second one: "There is a unique number 1 with the property that 1*a = a*1 =a" If you multiply anything by 1, you get the same number you started with. 5 * 1 = 5.

You mean the trigonometric identities?

Farsight, if you were serious, you'd read our suggestions and write your ideas in precise language with mathematics to back them up. I would greatly appreciate it if you stopped claiming you know the answers to things when your answer is vague and unproven. It is highly annoying and does not add anything to SFN.

I don't think it counts unless they're being serious

I think TalkOrigins has them covered.

Frankly it'll work as a topic, although I'm guessing it's been beaten to death already. We're pretty much splitting the responsibilities of dbunked, Snail handling the journalism and me the pseudoscience. If you have pseudoscience that you want debunked, pass it on to me. If you found a bad science article, send it to Snail. If it's some of both, send it to either one of us and we'll work out where to put it.

What error do you get when connecting? Just a simple "could not connect"? AFAIK no configuration has changed on this end. I don't even think IP bans would make the server refuse to allow you to connect. I can also check the server logs if you can't find anything on your end.

I have no idea what to do, but I'd suggest asking over here.

You are simply deferring the answer to my question as long as possible, or at least being intentionally obtuse. There will, at some point in the decision chain, be some person or group of persons who cannot just ask someone else for their opinion on the subject. How will they decide? That does not make it intrinsically right. And would you care to establish any specific case in which it is not true? In one case a person finds it reasonable and in the other case that person may not. I was not aware that most people ever entered a common consensus about values. And frankly "the common consensus" does not mean "everyone," and my point was that you cannot get everyone to agree on value issues. Your argument is irrelevant.

What errors do you get when compiling it?

Your post was indeed rude. I suggest you tone it down a bit.

I suggest you provide a source for that statement. In any case, I can provide a rebuttal, with sources. http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB101.html

Don't worry, I'm not trying to force you to work, I'm just making sure everyone got the message and is still alive.

Terminal velocity would be around 120 mph. I think people have had skydiving accidents before and were still mostly in one piece. I haven't exactly looked around for pictures though.

I don't think playing Halo will give TheUnknown a science education.

The trouble is that you want to find at what height the balls meet. So you'll need an equation for both that can tell you their heights at any given time.