Riogho

Well, the problem here is High School Chemistry is basically physics concepts, and some acid-base problems. High School physics is plugging numbers into equatons. High School biology is hell on earth.

I read his first post and thought it said 'When I am studying math I am constantly feeling my body'. It was pretty funny.

I'm going to be the most fantastic mathematician ever! Yeah, and I got a 'C' in Algebra 2

Number theory is very important. You also need to understand the distribution of primes. It is a good idea to have a strong grip on irrationals, particularly using Dedekind's cuts. Having a basic knowledge of trigonometric functions, infinite series, and possibly the ability to tie your shoelaces. Nah, you don't need much math for 'everyday life'. Except on that rare occassion where I needed to know the angle of a corner of a triangle, in which I used the sine function, I've never used anything much higher than elementary algebra. Though math itself is a very fun thing, and it seems you have a desire just to 'learn'. If you have that desire don't limit yourself on what you need for everyday life, just learn about it until you get sick of it, then find something else interesting.

MOND. It's driving me up the wall. The fact that on such a large level, the inside of galaxies the movement of the stars, that newton's laws break down. Speaking of F=ma here for very small accelerations. Obviously that was a terribly quick summary, but I'm assuming if you have anything to say on this topic, you know a little bit about it anyway. Does this not bother anyone else terribly? I never see ANY postings on it, very little discussion, anyone I've ever talked to hasn't even heard of it, but it is terribly accurate with observational evidence.

The best bet, is to use substitution. The adding and subracting of systems of equations can get messy. What you need to do is solve one of the equations for one variable. z=4 -3x + y Then substitute that in for z in the next equation. Your down to 2 variables now. Then take the third equation and solve for either x or y, then substitute that in, do some algebra and you got your answer, but no, I'm not going to do it for you.

Isn't the definition of Universe, everything?

The problem with a perfect vacuum is that it is a classical concept. ZPE is a QM concept, they don't mix. So if you're working with anything in the realm of the small, a 'perfect vacuum' or even 'absolute zero' are meaningless.

Hamster power!

Thanks to Galileo, this paradox can be proven not to be a paradox, but a confusion in physical properties of motion. The page turns past the first half distance, half way across the book. Let us say it has moved with a constant speed. Now, we use the same speed as it crosses the second half. Now as we continually do this, what is occurring with time? Time is being halved with a constant speed, because the distance is being halved. Since, the remainder of time to fully turn the page is being continually being halved, there will never be enough time to cross the full distance. Zeno conveniently cuts the very last moment in two, halving time and distance, making it seem impossible to pass the very last distance. Ironically, Zeno uses the common sense premise that the page does pass the first half of prior distances to base his argument. But, why would it not pass another equal half successfully, as his argument is based upon? It would. Even if the nonsense scenario that the last smallest half point is nothing, it would take no time to pass it, because it is not a distance at that point. It is not a paradox in terms of the basic formula that Galileo pointed out: speed = distance over time. Besides, distance is quanticized, so you cannot continue to cut space in half anyway. Also, simply calculus will prove it wrong. As an infinite sequence of numbers can add up to a finite answer.

So... time dilation actually works in little chunks of planck time?

So you're saying that charge itself is a property that is composed of two other properties? Like density being a property of mass and volume?

I say we accelerate the space station so that the forces acting on our bodies are equal to 1g. I win.

We don't feel like rewriting the text books and giving the quark a charge of 1, and -1, and making an electron three. It's that simple. But it isn't the quanta of charge.

On a side note, is there a quanta of time?

Except the charge of an electron is not an elementary charge.

A Reversible reaction doesn't necessarily always happen. Sometimes it requires activation energy. A chemical equilibrium, is where a reversible reaction is occuring continuously equal on both sides. It is important to note that it is not static. There is no extra net product on both sides, that is what makes it 'equal', but both reactions are continuously occuring.

Great book talking about how much string theory sucks.

Ooo... Can we see some sources, as to read further?

I remember seeing somewhere that Dark matter wasn't in black holes... let me go check that out again. Here ya go: Why doesn't dark matter fall into a black hole? A previously answered question stated that our galaxy could not be "sucked in" to the Black Hole at it's center because of the great distance between it and the nearest matter. If 95% of the universe is composed of "Dark Matter" and ergo also our Milky Way, then why isn't it feeding the Black Hole thereby increasing the event horizon to "someday" include all of the galaxy? You are right that the black hole at the center of the galaxy is increasing in mass as material falls onto it; this causes the Schwarzchild radius to increase a bit as well. However, dark matter very rarely falls into black holes for the same reasons that we don't see it: it interacts very little with itself and with ordinary matter. This is a problem because particles lose a quantity called angular momentum (which is proportional to the speed at which they circle around the galactic center and to their distance from it) by interacting with other particles. Now, the laws of physics say that in order for particles in an orbit around a black hole to fall into it, they must lose a large fraction of their angular momentum (this is essentially because black holes are very small; in order to fall in, then, the particles must get very, very close to the center of the galaxy, which means that they must go very, very fast if angular momentum is conserved). For ordinary particles this is not a problem: as they get closer to the black hole, they bump and rub against each other, losing rotational energy and angular momentum such that they spiral into the black hole (provided they are close enough to the galactic centre to begin with). But dark matter particles don't "bump and rub", by definition! This means that they can't lose angular momentum so they rarely get close enough to the black holes to be "sucked in". So, regardless of the amount of dark matter in the galaxy, it will not help fuel the black hole at its centre. http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=358

10^-43

Having an electron turning into an elephant appears to be impossible.

Then I wouldn't reccomend touching any of those other books we mentioned. Except possibly Black Hole and Time Warps, it is very very very simple. And if you don't understand just re-read the paragraph over and over until you do. Or give up and pursue a medical career.

If you're into the macrophysics, pick up the book I already mentioned. Pick up just about anything by Steven Hawking as well. The Universe in a Nutshell, a Brief History of time, all are great books. If you're a little interested in the Micro, I suggest starting with Leon Lederman's The God Particle.

I've read it three times, but it fell apart the last time I was reading it, and I was forced to pay attention in my biology class