studiot

Hello again DrDoggy, You started this post because you were unsure about ionisation so perhaps we should start at the beginning. Chemists regard molecules as the smallest lumps of matter. Molecules can be single atoms or connected groups of atoms. Normally they are electrically neutral, because although they contain positively and negatively charge sub atomic particles, they contain an equal number of each. Ionisation is the process of creating charged molecules from these neutral ones. This can happen in five ways. This can either be forced or some (unpreventable) natural processes can also cause ionisation Taking away or adding either positive or negative charges accounts for four of these mechanisms. Splitting a molecule into smaller charged molecules offers the fifth. Charged molecules are called ions. Silicon is a semiconductor and a solid in normal circumstances so passing electric current through it by applying a voltage will not result in ionisation. The application of increasing voltage from zero to a bar of silicon will simply show a small current increasing from zero with a roughly parabolic curve, until 0.6 volts habeen reached. At this voltage the current increases dramatically as electrons are promoted to the conduction band. Since electrons are supplied at one terminal of the bar, pass through the silicon in the conduction band and exit through the other terminal, electrons are never actually removed from the silicon atoms, and the semiconductor molecular lattice remains intact and overall neutral. An example of ionisation by applying an electric voltage would be a discharge tube such as a flourescent light fitting. Inside these once the ‘striking voltage’ is applied electrons are stripped from the molecules in the gas in the tube at one terminal and removed. This creates positive ions which migrate towards the other terminal where they receive electrons and return to neutral molecules.

Memory Stick was originally a Sony trade mark for additional non voltatile plug in memory in certain Sony video and still camera equipment. It was not compatible with other makes or types of plug in memory. It has become an instance where a particular brand has been taken by the public at large to represent a whole family of products like with Hoover for vacuum cleaner. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_Stick

Especially steam gravy trains. Steam is So....o.....oh environmentally friendly (Thanks to David Wardale)

Thank you for your summary, DimaMazin +1 It should be noted that your pink parabola from Wiki is not the one we are discussing, although it shows the important features. You do not need to use calculus or algebra to obtain the vertex x coordinate, which is what I meant by saying to use the geometric properties of a parabola. We are assuming an upright parabola, and the coefficient a is positive which means it is concave up, so has a minimum which we want. The x axis is a chord of this parabola, perpendicular to the axis, and any such chord is bisected by a vertical line through the vertex. So the vertex is halfway between the intercepts on the x axis (-2 and +4) ie through x = +1. Substituting this x value into the parabola equation already found does indeed yield y = -27.

I didn't introduce the question. I did, however, quote the post where the questiion was first posed Did you not read it? I'm not sure about whether the vacuum is important to the poster or not. It could also be that vacuum was mentioned because that is the only place light has velocity c. As to measurement of distance. Two basic methods are recognised. They are respectively called line standards and end standards. My micrometer is an end standard and requires simultaneous access to both ends of the mesureand. No relativity corrections or reference frames are therefore required. Note that large distances are not the only ones we measure, smaller ones are just as important. So I am simply objecting to a blanket statement/question that there is only one means of measurement of length or distance.

I don't see how this answers the question, which by the way was originally confined to measurement in a vacuum This was already answered in my post 15. The floating micrometer i used to measure distance in my first post after leaving school could operate in a vacuum if required.

These are good question so keep asking them.

As one who has little or no interest in the subjects you wish to pursue, I offer the following unbiased comment. Personally I have the greatest respect for the moderators here, I am too opinionated be as impartial as they are, even to the extent of applying rules they disagree with. You are obviously the same as I in that respect. But just, for one moment, place yourself in their shoes. How would you treat posters who consistently and perhaps flagrantly ignore the general rules of courtesy or the specific rules of this forum? personally I am too inclined to be rude to them. But our mods manage to moderate with civility. Could you do this? Some throw their toys out of the pram when faced with this situation. Are you adult enough to accept any single member's place in the scheme of things and co-operate this everyone else.? The rewards of doing this are great.

I am angry because DParliviet has been wasting my time. I told you more than once that MY ATOMIC CLOCK DOES NOT WORK LIKE THIS. In fact its function has nothing whatsoever to do with electrons or EM radiation. Yet, as Strange (+1) says, you keep repeating this nonsense, instead of saying "Hey, I've not heard of your type of atomic clock, please tell me more"

Hello, this is really CaptainPanic's field, but I haven't seen him around lately. Perhaps someone can get him on the batphone? For your information, this site accepts superscript and subscript useful for powers and indices without needing TEX. The toolbar has bold, italic, underline, strikeout, subscript, supercript and some. So I have written out you equation again for the benefit of those who don't realise it has powers in it. [math]\frac{{{G^E}}}{{RT}} = {x_1}{x_2}\left\{ {A + B\left( {{x_1} - {x_2}} \right) + C{{\left( {{x_1} - {x_2}} \right)}^2}} \right\}[/math] It is useful realise that in a binary system like yours, x2 = (1-x1) and to obtain the gammas you need to rearrange the xs and take logs. However we do not do homework for you, but can work with you to help you solve the problem. So please show what working you have so far. A useful reference is Redlich, Kister & Turnquist Chem Eng. Progr Symp Ser 48(2): 49, 1952.

If this was a response to my post 7 then try reading it again properly. But you are prepared to pronounce yourself expert anyway? Consider any physical quantity [math]\Psi [/math]. Then if there exists any function such that [math]\frac{{d\Psi }}{{dt}} = f(t)[/math] ; where t is time That is the rate of change of this quantity is a function of time alone, then this equation can be used as the basis of a distance indepedent clock as you originally asked for. A simple quantity is number and I offered this in my atomic clock. [math]\frac{{dN}}{{dt}}[/math] is quite independent of distance (or the motion of counter or material , though that was not actually specified). In fact the progress of many chemical reactions can be measured in this way. The reaction will proceed equally well in a petri dish or a swimming bath or a tall measuring cylinder. The same rate laws apply to all. You also need to understand the difference between the dependent and the independent variable. Some processes can depend on time, but measurement can be most conveniently made as a distance, for example the burning of the candle you mentioned or the reading in a fuel tank sight gauge. In both cases a distance is a convenient (dependent) function of time, which is the independent variable. The actual property changing is a different dependent variable that is more difficult to measure than distance.

I gave several examples in post#7

Can you apply the inverse scattering transform to the correlation (probability) version of Bell's theorem, in the same way that the fourier transform applies to ordinary correlation (probability) version? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_scattering_transform

My atomic clock counts decayed radioactive atoms. Distance is not involved. My charge clock measures the charge on a capacitor. Again distance is not involved. I'm sure others can think of more clocks which only have to count. Edit Paleontologists use yet more methods of measuring time. For instance. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/87968-fossil-use-in-calibrating-molecular-dating/

1 comes after 12, of course. Look at a clock. It is an abstract example of what you are asking. In this case it is called modular arithmetic. Modular arithmetic is a counting technique whereby we count the fabric of a continuuum of numbers up to a certain number (12 in this case) and then start again, effectively bringing 13 in coincidence with 1 (or 0 if you include it). This idea also underlies the answer to your second question. 1 are 13 are the separated parts of a number continuum, but since they are both abstract we can only bring them together in the abstract. It is the object of much speculation as to whether this could occur or we could do this for a physical object, ie the 'fabric of spacetime'. The Mobius strip and Klein bottle are famous examples of this in lower dimensions.

No.

It is very easy to create a connection (used in a looser sense than the strict mathematical definition of a 'connection') between two separated parts of a mathematical object. Whether such a connection has any reality, or is just a mathematical curiosity, is another matter. What number comes after 12? Have you heard of a Mobius strip or a Klein bottle?

Yes it is exactly as stark as that. Even in non relativistic physics light plays a fundamental role because it is a result of a form wave motion, as predicted from the physical laws that govern it. If these equations did not result in some form of wave motion would that mean that wave motion was excluded? So water waves, sound waves and all the mechanics associated with wave motion would be lost to our universe. Dislocation theory in solid mechanics would not work, Quantum effects would fails so electronics, chemical reactions, ................ This list of physics that would not hold is mind bogglingly large if the wave equation were not true.

I'm not sure what the american for 'white spirit' is.

Next, you will be asking what would an Englishman have for breakfast with his eggs if bacon did not exist, or what would he eat for lunch with his fish if chips did not exist.

Fiveworlds, it would be interesting to know how you continued your analysis to find the minimum. There are several non mainstream methods that could be used in attacking this whole problem. Yours sounds equivalent to moving the parabola to a new position relative to axes.

Why do so many potential theories loose credibility by going over the top? The deepest ocean is only 11km deep. http://geology.com/records/deepest-part-of-the-ocean.shtml

There are enormous spin-off and long term benefits to be gained for all humanity in changing our way of life for the better in response to the climate change issue. For example as a youth I can remember walking round our towns and cities in the 1950s. Most of the buildings and particularly the railway bridges were black, due to a soot coating. Since the Clean Air Acts, I have watched the brickwork emerging from behind its coating and take great comfort that I am not breathing the shit that my ancestors did for the last couple of hundred years. This is a small example that affects over 80% of folk in the UK. The list of such improvements could go on and on. We must not stop now and say, the job is done. It is not. We still have a long way to go.

Yeay you are getting there. You get three equations connecting a, b and z . But because they refer to the same parabola they are the same a , b and z in each equation. We say the equations are simultaneous. So you can solve these three equations to find a, b and z, as you did back in post 5 In order to help a little bit I will tell you that a = 3 is a good guess, or you can just go ahead and find all three. What do you make a, b and z? So when you have found a,b and z you can write down the equation of your particular parabola, that passes through the given points. So you can find any point on it if you know x or y, you can calculate the other. The point you want to find is the minimum. Now I asked you back in post4 what you know about the parabola as you have two ways to do this. You can either use the calculus to differentiate the equation and se this equal to zero to find the minimum if you know how to do this. Or you can use the geometric properties of the parabola (in this case the symmetries) to find the axis and thus the vertex, which is the geometrical name for the minimum. So we await your next input.

But modern politics has made an amazing leap forward when it was realised that individual citizens no longer have to work hard wasting resources. Their government can do this much more efficiently for them, whilst the citizens take their ease, if they can still afford it.