fuhrerkeebs

If you just want a way to approach it, use the principle of conservation of momentum for problem a. For problem b, just find the difference between the momentum of just car A and the total momentum after the collision (which is just the total momentum altogether, because the momentum is conserved), and them for problem c just say that you assumed that the collision was completely elastic so that no energy was lost. For problem d, just use the force equations and some other elementary formula for velocity and position and such (it's actually simple, if you want I'll go through it for you).

I voted that I don't know, although I do believe that there is life out there somewhere. However, I'm not going to give a definite "yes" or "no" answer until my belief can be verified. Except for all of the predictions and explanations it gives that we've verified that the classical non-relativistic Newtonian theory of gravity doesn't offer.

Fundamental Formulas of Physics, Vol. 1 by D.H. Menzel was my first introduction to spinors, and it pretty much covers all of the important stuff. If you want, I'll post a little introduction to spinors when I get back from church... Oh, and Cartan's book is really good too...however, it's much more lengthy than FFoP and it doesn't really contain that much more info on just spinors (the whole second part of the book is on applications to physics...ie Dirac's equation, using spinors in SR, etc.)

Oh, and when I was about 9 years old I had this obsession with lighting fires in coffee cans. Well, I was in the laundry room playing with the coffee cans and fire, when I accidently knocked one over and onto a little pile of clothes...and I decided that the laundry detergent would be the best thing to put it out (I thought that it would act like sand). None of the clothes really caught on fire, but a few of my little brothers PJs melted.

Me and my friend Justin did something like that one day...except we didn't have anything except for the rocket engines (no launch pad or anything), so we just hooked up the wire thingies in the back to a 9-volt battery. Justin ended up having to go to the hospital because the rocket burned his leg.

Just do it again on the second integral...or use an integral table (they're always handy).

Yeah...quantum computers will factor huge numbers extremely fast...but we'll also be able to generate huge numbers too. And besides, the quantum effects come built in with certain "security" features, I guess you could call them.

Ahh...the most I can get in a row is 5.

Yeah, a function is analytic in a regionl if it's complex differentiable at every point in that region.

It's a function in the complex plane that is holomorphic (analytic) except at singularities.

Orson Scott Card never wrote a book called Genocide...

Why don't you try and use some datura? I had a friend who took it one time and he just sat around for hours talking to people who weren't there. However, I believe it's very poisonous, so you might want to be careful what you do with it.

I doubt the eugenol is illegal, because in 48 of the 50 states you can legally buy clove cigarettes with that stuff in it, and I can go down to my grocery store right now and buy clove oil, which is pretty much the same stuff.

What about the eugenol from cloves? Or getting the opiates from poppy seeds or lettuce? I've also heard that eating alot of nutmeg is like smoking pot (although I've never tried it, nor would I know whether it gives you the same high feeling, as I've not yet tried weed).

I thought virtual photons were a consequence of integrating over all of the momentum in the propagator, on mass-shell and off?

Obviously you think they should be trying to cure the common cold instead of curing things like AIDS and cancer. Personally, I'm glad that there's no cure for the common cold yet, because it means that MDs are out there trying to cure things that actually harm people instead of something that makes you sneeze.

You do know that people die...right?

Which is where the problem of defining the term living comes from...so I find it much easier to not consider anything "alive."

Just take the partial of each entry...say you had \partial_i g^{ij}, where g^{1,0}=x^0, g^{0,1}=x^1, and g^{ij}=0 when i != j, then you would just do the sum and take the partials, like this: A^j = \partial_i g^{ij} = \partial_=0 g^{0j} + \partial_1 g^{1j} So, A^0=2, A^1=0. Note that I ranged my indices from 0 to 1, and that I used the summation convention (in case that wasn't implied).

Your process isn't right, but your answer is. The nth derivative of e2x is 2ne2x. Using that, just plug in n=6 and you get 26=64.

Gravity.

Don't bother...I bought a pack of nicotine-free cigarettes of the internet before and all they did was make me want to smoke a real cigarette even more.

The particle that carries that magnetic force has spin 0, while the particle that carries gravity is conjectured to have spin 2. Magnetism works off of charge, gravity works off of energy-momentum. Charge can be both positive and negative, while only positive amounts of mass have been observed. There is no magnetic field unless you have moving charge, whereas there is a gravitational field whether the mass is moving or not. They don't seem to be similar at all, except for the fact that gravity is attractive and magnetism can be attractive.

Why would it take the path of least resistance? The way I see it, it would be taking the path of most resistance, because matter is attracted to matter, and the path that contains the most matter would have the most resistance.

The particle that mediates the gravitational force (if there is one) has a spin 2, whereas the photon is spin 0.