questionposter

Life was able to form because UV doesn't penetrate sea water completely, supposedly.

Yeah, I figured it out. My goal isn't to find the side lengths, its to find the trigonometric properties of a triangle that uses the given. So in a 30-60-90 triangle, the only way I could devise a theorem for it is to relate the side lengths, so I need to find a real 30-60-90 triangle in order to figure out how the side lengths relate, and how those side-lengths relate is what I'm trying to find, not the side lengths themselves. So no matter what, the hypotenuse of a 30-60-90 will be 2x, the base will be x, and the other leg will be √(3)*x, but I need to use real side lengths in a real 30-60-90 triangle in order to figure out that pattern in the first place, only in the case of the problems, I'm only given one property of a triangle and I have to figure out the rest based on that one property, which includes using the side lengths that the given property generates. Thanks for trying to help though. So basically, I CAN pick any number of side lengths as long as they all relate in the way they are suppose to. The answer book was just using the simplest side lengths to relate.

So if the only information I'm given is sinΘ=1/2 or tanΘ=1/5, those are just ratios, how could I only have one set of side lengths from that? It could be a bunch of different side lengths, so why is it only assuming one possible set of side length? When could that assumption ever come on handy? So if the given is cosΘ=1/3, then when I look up the answers, the side lengths of the triangle are adjacent=1 and hypotenuse=3, but it could be a bunch of different numbers, not just 1 and 3. It could be 2 and 6, or 1 and 1/3, or 1/3 and 2/6 and etc. Oh wait a minute, I think it's asking me to find the trigonometric functions, therefore in order to find the corresponding identities and co-functions, I have to use a specific set of side lengths that have the same ratios as the given, so my goal isn't to evaluate the lengths of the triangle, its just to find the functions and co-functions, which means I need get them by using real side lengths right? Huh, I didn't know it automatically merged double posts.

Ok, the universe could easily be infinitely huge and the chances of life forming in any specific planet in the universe are very very slim, possibly even 1/∞ if the universe actually is infinitely huge.

Well, if the given is just a ratio, how does the triangle have only 1 exact answer per side length of a triangle? Because when I look up the answers, they are specific numbers, but that can't be right because 1/2 is the same as 2/4 or 3/6, I could have any number of side lengths. The way it works is, if the given is theta, like tanΘ = 5/1, then the opposite of the triangle is 5 units and the base is 1 unit in length, but couldn't it be 10 and 2 or 1 and (1/5)? Why does it assume that? How could that ever work in the real world?

So I've noticed that based on problems I've worked on, whenever the degree is known, for some reason I should automatically assume there's a unit circle involved, and when the degree isn't known and the angle is just left as theta, then the problem is for some reason automatically talking about degrees instead, but I have no idea why. So what if the angle is known? I don't see a unit circle magically appearing when I'm measuring the angle of a window or whatever. It's something like this, it's not identity, it's just trigonometric functions. Givens: sin30°=1/2 tan30°=√(3)/3 What I need to find: a. csc30° which on a unit circle is 2 b. cot60° 30-60-90 triangle on a unit circle, by answering "c." first, I came up with (1/2)/√(3/4) which I believe simplifies to (4√(3/4))/3 c. cos30° which because of the Pythagorean theorem is 1²-(1/2)² = .75 or 3/4, so cos=√(3/4) d. cot30° which is √(3/4)/(1/2) which I believe simplifies to 2√(2/4) I mean I know those coordinates correspond to a point on a unit circle, but why do I automatically have to talk about radians just because I know the angle? If the sin is 1/2, couldn't the side lengths be any ratio of size that forms 1/2, like the side lengths are 2 and 4, or 8 and 16? Why do the givens automatically become the side lengths when the actual side lengths could be any numbers that have a ratio of 1/2? Couldn't I have 1/4 and 1/2 as side lengths too?

Right, but how does that directly suggest that space isn't flat on its own? Isn't the only way the sun could warp space in that way have to be the result of if space was otherwise flat?

It's sort of funny how everyone makes a big deal out of religions and the meaning of life because I don't see any other species of animal really paying attention to all these ideas we come up with. Wolfs and zebras and fish and etc obviously still think life is worth living, at least in some way, yet they have no faith we know of.

To me it does not make any sense whatsoever than increasing your knowledge would cause you to age more. What happens with aging is your cells eventually stop dividing and the ends of your chromosomes shrink over time.

Any sort of complex telepathy that's like sending works to people's brains or moving objects is bunk. There's no way something like DNA could at this point mutate to be able to control higher dimensions to send information especially because that doesn't make sense as higher dimensions with the exception of time are folded up in spaces even smaller than atoms.

There's still no limit even if molecules vibrate at near the speed of light other than I suppose the speed of light, but you could keep getting infinitely closer to the speed of light. Other than that though, not all heat is just atoms vibrating, it's also photons and energy level, and I don't see a limit with that unless matter can become so hot that it is no longer matter, but something else that was probably around the first 1*10^-44 seconds during the big bang.

In that theory isn't space still being curved from mass and energy? I would imagine that if nothing is immediately around you then the only reason space would curve if because the force of gravity never dissipates to 0 or maybe because of photons. Also, I still don't get the point of your equations. The fabric of space curves sometimes noticeably and gravity dissipates like a wave. How does that mean the fabric of space wouldn't be flat without anything in it? Or are you trying to suggest it will never be flat because there will always be gravity and light to effect space wherever we go?

Have you ever heard the phrase "it's not what you say, it's how you say it?" I see what you mean, it doesn't really matter, but someone might have brought up the point "Well wait, that's in Celsius or Fahrenheit, not Kelvin".

Well, I suppose if there's no God or mystical force, there's nothing determining what you have to do, so you could accomplish anything you want whether its changing the world or just being a normal person, the only thing in your way is you. Why they brought into the world? Because that's just how life works here, its just part of how things happen, that's what living things here do. Why do they have to die? They don't "have" to die, but they should accept that they will probably eventually die and they will understand it better when they are older. Probably something like that, nothing that demoralizing or anything that a lot of those atheists like to do to religious people. Although, I might actually take my kids to some kind of church or teach them about religions because there's still many good values and stories in a lot of religions. Jesus was a pretty good person. I'm pretty sure he wasn't born from a virgin and God and that he didn't rise from the dead, but he was a pretty nice and wise person, so we should listen to him on at least some things. The only problem is many people are losing those values

But waves can also be described as a simple sine wave and more often are, and in fact, sine waves come from a unit circle, and in a unit circle, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. What your describing is I think the probability of particles, and probability is different than angles and length. Also, did you just google "wave equations" and click on the first link and post the equations just to make yourself look smart? http://en.wikipedia....i/Wave_equation Because that entire post isn't very helpful for me to understand why space itself is curved unless your suggesting that the fabric of space itself is a wave and photons are part of that waving spacial fabric, which there isn't much evidence for if any at all, but perhaps some expert could explain it if I'm not getting something.

I would say that blobal warming does not mean the end of the human race, especially with all the technology we have. All it means is we will live in a much more hostile world in the future.

The real truth is that space doesn't naturally curve unless there is something to bend it. That's why in relatively not curved space, the angles in a triangle add up to exactly 180 degrees rather than more or less, because of space was curved negatively, then the angles in a triangle would appear to be less than 180 degrees, and if it was curved positively, the angles in a triangle would appear to be more than 180 degrees in the absence of a lot of mass to distort space a lot. However, this flat space could go on infinitely, no one knows, we definitely don't know a lot about the whole universe, all we know as what we can measure.

Wait a minute, if virtual particles just "gave up" their energy to another particle, shouldn't atoms radiate all their energy away through the forces they transmit?

My bad, I thought you were using it to refer to a person, as in "person x, the person who said these things had this to say about science..."

It's like saying God doesn't exist because we have seen him, therefore no one has faith in him and he can't be real.

It wasn't really meant to be negative, but you seemed to make a bigger deal out of the situation that you had to. Temperatures higher than 1000 billion K have been achieved according to experiments.

We can't come up with a concrete definition because because its not a physical entity you can just quantify and observe. As far as we can tell, where intelligence comes from is complex beyond our knowledge.

But the mouse coming from a haystack is the idea itself, and it's not good or bad, its just wrong. The idea of creationism at least in the way its currently interpreted has been proven to not be right in some cases, and in other cases it just can't be determinate if it's right or wrong. Not only that, but I don't know who is "Ottomh" guy is, and changing the way you look at things and accepting new ideas that explain things better than old ideas is part of science anyway.

Ok, so 4 trillion is bigger than 1 trillion, are you happy with that? Do you wanna break that down some for everyone so they can understand?

Well, evolution is pretty sound, I'm pretty sure I even saw it in my backyard, so how about that what God said wasn't properly interpreted? I mean it was also interpreted from creationism that mice were born from or created out of hay stacks, and boy was that wrong.