w=f[z]

Seems like I saw a documentary of a tribe in South America where one day out of the year everyone intermingled in an orgy-type thing. The rule was that a woman couldn't say no for any reason. It was a way for the tribe to "share" and to stress the importance of sharing. Other "flings" would happen throughout the year too, but they set aside this special day for a huge "swapping party." Then one day some guy got jealous and ruined the whole thing for the tribe.... True story - no joke. Cheers

Dare I ask... what does "pwn" in "pwned" mean? Forgive me as I'm a bit out of the loop.... Edit: Nevermind... Wiki to the rescue. Cheers

Do a series of substitutions. For example; let [math]f=2^t , \ t=3^{x^2}[/math] [math]\Rightarrow \frac{df}{dt}=2^t \ln{2}[/math] So [math]2^{3^{x^2}} \ln{2} [/math] will be in your answer. Then let [math]x^2=s[/math] and differentiate [math]3^s \Rightarrow 3^s\ln{3} \Rightarrow 3^{x^2} \ln{3} [/math], so that too will be in your answer via the chain rule and so on. See the pattern? Good luck chap, w=f[z]

Can we spell Feynman without the y...? I think Einstein is the only way to spell it. The following are just guesses (who knows how someone else may have (mis)-spelled a name)... Lorentz or Lorenz Kamerlingh seems like a candidate for a mispelling... I don't know... Sounds like you have a pretty good technique going on though. Cheers, w=f[z]

Indeed, how could I have forgotten MTW's Gravitation.... Cheers P.S. I guess I didn't really care much for Peskin & Schroder either, but it's what we used when I took the class....

A 100-level astronomy book might be handy too. For that, Seeds, or Fix, or Kaufmann, or basically any of them might be a good idea. Cheers

Hi Somerlad, Well, we generally call a book by its authors name. So here are a few suggestions, some of which are standard texts used in the courses: For intro physics, that is, the first two-semester sequence-type of book, they are all just about the same. Whichever you can get the cheapest will suffice. But Serway, and Resnick, Halliday, & Krane are pretty standard. For modern physics (physics III typically), I'm not really sure anymore, but Krane has a nice one and Rolff is another. For quantum mechanics, Griffiths is pretty well used. Sakurai and Cohen-Tannoudji are more at the graduate level. For astro, Carroll & Ostlie or Zeilik is pretty standard. For electricity and magnetism, Griffiths is pretty standard. (The same Griffiths as QM.) Jackson at the graduate level. For mechanics, I'm not really sure anymore for the undergrad level, but at the graduate level, Goldstein is standard. For general relativity, Schutz, Carroll, and Hartle are pretty standard. (The Carroll one used to be able to get free (pdf) online....) Carroll being the most advanced. For thermodynamics and statistical mechanics, I'm not really sure about the undergrad level, but I used Reif in grad school. For quantum field theory, Peskin & Schroder is pretty standard for grad school, but Ryder has a nice paperback. For math methods, Boas for undergrad and Arfken & Weber for grad-level. For optics, Hecht is pretty standard. For string theory, Polchinski. But it may be dated by now.... I better warn you before you spend a lot of money though... most of these are pretty advanced. If I were you, I'd start out with a cheap calculus-based intro book and go from there. Although, I think Boas might be a good one to have handy. Good luck, w=f[z]

Actually... if it's a book list you want, we'll need to know if you want the "mathy"-type, or books more for the layman. Cheers

My personal opinion... this approach may get old fast. You could instead read some of the "theories" presented here (or elsewhere) and see if you can come up with arguments against (or for) them. Of course, this involves reading up in that particular area, but it might be fun for a while. And forums like this aren't short of "theories" that show all of known science to be incorrect.... Whatever you do though, good luck. Cheers, w=f[z]

Seems like the guys at "Google rec.puzzles" didn't have any luck with it either... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.puzzles/browse_thread/thread/6320363ff8b2a18e?hl=en&lr=lang_en&rnum=1

[math]A^\mu _{\ ; \nu}=\frac{\partial A^\mu}{\partial x^\nu}+\Gamma^\mu_{\nu \lambda}A^\lambda \ \ \ A _{\mu ; \nu}=\frac{\partial A_\mu}{\partial x^\nu}-\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu \nu}A_\lambda[/math] Just goofin' around.... Very glad this forum has LaTeX.

I agree with ajb, it's a bit dated. I read it about 12 years ago. I liked it then, so I can't say not to read it. But there may be more recent books to your liking.... Cheers

Would it help to mention that all you need to solve this is a little algebra and some intro-physics type knowledge.... Cheers

I know the feeling gnpatt. Since you are spending a lot of effort on this, it might be worthwhile to read the other forum thread (provided in the original post) if you haven't already. I'd like to punch the originator of this puzzle in the face. If this has a solution though, we're likely to stumble on it sooner or later. Sorry, but lately I just can't spare the time to attack it myself (but I've already spent a lot of time on it...). Thanks for your efforts though! Cheers, w=f[z]

Bingo! Read the original post carefully and see if you spot my subtle hint.... Cheers

Why not suggest instead that he act Mexican? Sooner or later that is bound to catch on and he would then be known as one of the pioneers of that genre.... ?orele que bato? w=f[z]

Just so we're all clear on this... If we turn left (as in the problem), and say we have a ball resting on the dashboard, the ball will move right relative to the car. Yes? Cheers

Did you mean left IA?

Hi YT, This problem has been known to confuse physicists a time or two. You might want to reconsider.... Cheers

Hi everyone, Here is one more to go along with the balloon and 1/4 mile questions while I'm at it. Let's say you are standing near a cliff. You crack open a bottle of beer and immediately let go of the bottle over the cliff (imagine it remains upright throughout the fall and no beer spills during the fall). (I know, I know... what a waste of beer - even in the interest of science....) So the question is this; which way do the bubbles move relative to the bottle during the fall? Cheers (literally ) w=f[z] P.S. Again, newbie here. So sorry if this has already been discussed.

Muchas gracias! [math]\mu_s=3.34[/math]

Here is a little question; Let's say you are driving along in your car on a cold-autumn day. You have a passenger in the center of the back seat that is holding a helium-filled balloon in front of them by the string. You make a sharp left turn around a bend in the road. Which way does the balloon move relative to the car? (Justify your answer.) Cheers, w=f[z] P.S. I'm still really new here, so my apologies if this has already been discussed.

Warning: MATH ALERT Here may be a fun problem for you to think about and solve... In 1989, Shirley Muldowney set a new record for the fastest 1/4 mile by a wheel-driven car. If I told you that the coefficient of static friction between her tires and the road was mu = 3.34, what was her best possible time? Cheers, w=f[z] Footnote: Her record has been broken since, but I'm too lazy to look up the new number and owner of that number. Edit: Would someone be kind enough to tell me how to get LaTeX to work here. For example, $\mu=...$ doesn't seem to work. Thanks!

Hi gnpatterson, I recall I got non-integer values also. It would be nice if they were integers (damn it!)! Makes me wonder if a "c" in Curie is not equal to a "c" in Planck... that would be devious.... In other words, maybe there is a function that needs to be employed from one name to the next. I don't know. This puzzle pisses me off. Thanks to everyone taking a stab at this one. I'm dying to know the relation. Cheers, w=f[z]