studiot

Perhaps I should report this post for threats it contains.? I offered you some simple facts, why do you want to hide your head in the sand? And why do you want argument?

Here is a true story about the Romans, who had conquered everybody and anybody in their path. Whilst it is true that their superior military resources won through in the end, when they first came to Britain, they nearly lost everything because they rejected simple basic advice form others. The tides in the Mediterranean are nearly non existant, so they failed to allow for the much higher tides in the Atlantic/North Sea and nearly lost all their boats. It seems to me that you are doing the same.

None of this is true. I am not trying to prove anything. Either you want help and answers or your don't. You can only base suitable questions on existing knowledge. The more quickly you come to terms with this the more quickly your will develop your own knowledge and understanding. The differences I mentioned are often not brought out well in physics and other technical courses, so it is a rude awakening for students when they realise that oscillations, waves and sine curves are not the same things. This was meant to help, not hinder.

So if you know the difference perhaps you can confirm what it is? What is the difference between the frequency of oscillation and the frequency of a wave? Why does a wave have a wavelength, but an oscillation doesn't

My knowledge of label propagation is mainly in network flows. I don't know much about its application to social science or economics. I think Zhukov's lectures cover your application. http://www.leonidzhukov.net/hse/2015/networks/lectures/lecture17.pdf

Watching this thread it is immediately obvious that Dalo needs to study the basics of wave motion before he can appreciate the next steps. What he is attempting to understand is far beyond his present knowledge. Dalo, in your last thread I gave you a list of things you need to know before you could understand the answer to your question. You chose not to ask anything about any one of them, so I didn't proceed further. Here is another shorter list. The first thing you need to know is the difference between an oscillation, a wave and a sine curve. Not understanding this trips many people up when they try to study waves.

Before I waste any time on this do you seriously want to find out or do you just want to expound your theories on a subject you admittedly know little about? There are many types of waves. All waves are disturbances of the Queen's peace in some way. Some waves transport energy. Some waves transport matter. Some waves follow linear mathematical laws. Some waves follow non linear mathematical laws. Waves can have one two or three dimensional structures (ignoring fancy theories like string theory) Within those structures their may have different geometries so the first thing to do when asking what happens if two (or more) wave interact is to examine their respective structures eg what happens when a plane wave meets a spherical wave? An interesting experiment is the study of Lecher Lines. https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=AksZWojYPMvZgAaj-4nwBA&q=lecher+lines&oq=lecher+lines&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0.1160.3289.0.3488.12.12.0.0.0.0.192.1335.1j10.11.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.11.1326...46j0i131k1j0i131i46k1j46i131k1j0i46k1j0i10k1j0i22i30k1j0i22i10i30k1.0.bGoieGes9IM

OK The car is real and exists. The road and yellow lines are real and exist. What does not exist and has to be constructed is the gap between any poimt of the car and the end of the yellow lines. I said take the car as a cube so we can easily determine its centroid. Take the position line (x axis) as the line along the road and the 'position' of the car as the x value of its centroid. So what is the minimum uncertainty you can accept in x to ensure that the car does not attract a fine when parked, given the x values of the extent of the yellow lines? Still on a motoring note here is a more difficult one which bring out the difference further. The Police speed check is 2% accurate. Your speedometer is 10% accurate. The Police say "we clocked this car at 44 mph in a 30 mph zone" Is the uncertainty sufficient to avoid a conviction? Note the issue of the beam balance rider position has an additional twist because of the position of the fulcrum.

Archeologists can also get it wildly wrong. I remember a Science Fiction story I read once about a group of cosmic archeologists digging through the ruins of a planet the inhabitants had wrecked. The found a picture strip which they worked out were sequential frames so they worked out how to view the film. Upon watching they came to the conclusion that the planet was the most hostile place in the universe. Stick like inhabitants wandered around but were constantly being blown up, shot or knocked down. Yet they seemed to keep getting up to be knocked down etc again and again. At the end of film there was a scene they couldn't work out, but seemd to be writing of some sort. It said It said "A Looney Tunes production"

You might get some value out of Donal O'Shea's book The Poincare conjecture. O'Shea is professor of Mathematics at Mount Holyoke in Massachusetts, in particular the maths of this type of geometry. He strikes me as a bit like ajb here. Genial and approachable. Anyway the book is popsci really but correct, unlike those written by journalists. Sir William Hamilton was a 19th century Irish Mathematician who invented Quaternions (These are mentioned in the book) Richard Hamilton is a current day American Mathematician who discovered the geometric manifold conjecture. Fermat was totally separate.

So far as we know, many fundamental particles (eg the electron) have no natural end and no one can definitely say they had a beginning either. This not only applies at the microscale but also at the largest scale of all to the universe itself. Unlike Voltaire I don't need a crutch.

I started this thread to discuss this question, amongst others. The point is that Heisenberg uncertainty has the same roots as classical uncertainty I offered there. Objects do not have zero size. Even a one dimensional object stetches from point X1 to point X2. So when you calculate a quantity that depends on X, what value do you take for X? X1 or X2 or somewhere in between? This and other matters concerning uncertainty are discussed in the thread I linked to.

Yes I seem to remember they put it in the middle of the character height. The confusing thing is they also have a bent loop for another number (khamsa or 5) http://www.softschools.com/languages/arabic/numbers_1_10_in_arabic/

But I actually posted the previous thread a few weeks ago and had replies etc. Surely after posting the thread the system should automatically clear the box ready for the next thread creation? Note I stated that I typed a title into an empty title box. That is I assumed the system had done just what I said. But yes I too have found the site message autosave useful when posting in existing threads. This particular event has never happened to me before or since.

Unfortunately I can't show exactly how they represented it in 1976. My last post was the nearest I can get.

Godel killed Hilbert's dream a nearly century ago. Firstly you still haven't answered this. Did you or someone else disprove Godel's two theorems whilst I was in the bath?

When I first worked in Arab countries I had a shock on prices in shop windows. There is no symbol for zero in Arabic. So they use the decimal point. So 50 is written 5. I thought I was getting a bargain when I tried to buy something.

This is more perceptive than you perhaps realise. The principle of least time (Fermat) is now over 350 years old but still stands. Light takes the path of least time. In those days the size and shape of the Universe was assumed fixed. However in the last 35 years we have come to the startling conclusion that the shape and measurement of size (indeed its very geometry) varies with the scale over which you measure it. The work of Richard Hamilton between say 1980 and 2000 started this and the Perelman received the Fields medal in 2006 for his proof of the Poincare conjecture (and more) which underlies it all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman

A salutory lesson indeed. +1

Thank you Strange, +1. I will investigate that possibility.

I got this lot from google lotts chemistry sets, but I think that company has gone the way of all flesh. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lotts+chemistry+sets&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=1TgVWuDwLIb98wfJ-LngBQ My pick http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19050342 The Science Museum advert at the top is disappointing as it only offers the usual two fingers to would be purchasers.

Which just proves what I said If the output = the input I have an equation, but no algorithm has taken place. By the way why have you not answered my earlier question about Godel's theorems The problem is that you are to all embracing with your assertions to the exclusion of other equally valid possibilities. If you had said one type or use of an equation is "whatever you said" that would be OK. BTW2 Do you know the difference between an equation and an identity in mathematics?

So If I said what happens if I write the equation the other way round? You have just defined a as the input, so how can it also be the output or is that a different equation? BTW are twelve pence equivalent to one shilling?

Not always, no. How about the equation a=b ? Where is the input, the algorithm and the output?

This was inspired by a recent incident in thread posting and takes the form of a competition to think of the worst case scenario. The scene a computer controlled situation where a user is offered an input box to input instruction, but the computer is programmed to substitute the requirements of the previous user. To start of here is a scenario. A guy goes into a robot surgery clinic for an ingrowing toenail. She wakes up to discover the previous user had a sex change.