studiot

Coincidentally I have been reading a mediocre science fiction thriller that turns out to be in part about aliens dividing by zero. Deep Storm : Lee Child : 2007

You have already wasted money, time and effort on the wrong equipment because you have tried to tell electrical experts what you should have. Instead of saying "I want to stabilise my mains to 220 volts" or even My mains varies and sometimes drops as low as 180 volts. Say I need to supply the following equipment { Insert List} and if possible why you think 220 volts is so critcal. Then let the experts ask the questions designed to point you at the appropriate solution. Also if I understand you correctly you are saying that you run power devices in the 10 amp range at 220 volts without any safety precaution (ie no earth) I would advise you this is very dangerous and against Pakistan Electrical codes since at least as far back as 1937. https://www.google.co.uk/#q=Pakistan+electrical+earthing+code

Phi for all you need to do is stick a pin in your screen to chose one of them. I tried here but missed the my screen and got my foot instead.

An ocean has several characteristics that make it self contained. One of these is ocean currents. You can see from the picture (courtesy NASA) that the Southern Atlantic Ocean and the Northern Atlantic Ocean are effectively separate oceans in this respect. And of course the Indian Ocean is another. The currents circulate the water within the given ocean basin. Note that the S Atlantic current is cold and the Indian O current is warm on opposite sides of Africa. Further to the south lies the Southern Ocean that surrounds Antarctica and the current there is known as the circumpolar current because it goes all the way round. Shouldn't this be in Earth Science, not Chemistry? Note this is a simplified explanation, but a good start.

Way back at the beginning you were dismissive when I commented that many others had had similar ideas before you and that a great deal of work had already been done and suggested that you could save yourself effort by tapping into this and adding your two penn'rth to the world wide effort. To save Professor Strange some hair note that pairs and larger groupings of numbers are identified with many mathematical objects, each with unique useful properties, such as vectors, complex numbers and quaternions, Bra and Ket, to name but a few. When you have more than two, more complex groupings are possible as with Matrices, Tensors etc. The correct word for this is n-tuple (where n is 2 in your case) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuple Since there is already a well developed mathematical framework for these things, it is encumbent upon you to develop your system in line with this framework (extending it as necessary) and all the (mathematical) world will applaud if it turns out that you have genuinely thought of something new.

Has Christmas come early this year?

I count 12 question marks in your post. That's too many question to start one post so which one do you want answered?

So why bother?

There is an awful lot to get your head around in this part of physical chemistry and it takes a lot of time and effort. But you seem to be making real progress. The thing to remember about energy is that there are lots of forms of energy and most can be converted from one form to another. However Nature is not that generous because it exacts a charge for doing this and that is what quantities like Gibbs and Helmhottz energy and entropy are all about. Ask about these when you are ready for a gentle introduction.

Think about Mt Everest as a self supporting skyscraper of height just under 9km. The mountain is basically solid (ie has no internal rooms). But to 'stand up' it sinks into the crust of the Earth many km. Many being 5.6 times its height http://geoscience.wisc.edu/~chuck/Classes/Mtn_and_Plates/mtn_roots.html see the section marked implications for mountain ranges.

I have already proposed more modest goals , and this was accepted. Thank you for your comments, I need all of the nudging I can get.

You still have not appreciated the implications of what I said about digital phtographs and programs. Programs change the actual RGB values of pixels to suit their purpose. I would add to Strange's list that error of continually introducing new material (examples) before fully dealing with existing ones. With every point you introduce new photos and new goose chases. Small wonder you are 'running round in circles'. I posted that one single photo as it contains examples of almost all the effect I and others have mentioned, including the most recent that of the influence of adjacent colour. But don't follow string junkie's advice and give up. Reappraise and regroup and follow at least some of the sound advice given here. Here is a good site to find out a huge amount about the vagairies of digital photography and colour. They have lots of tutorials. http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/color-management-printing.htm Look up Antialiasing Subpixel rendering https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/conservative-morphological-anti-aliasing-cmaa-update

For those of us that don't know or are just as thick as me can you tell us what an atmospheric river is please.

Of course it does. The rate of charge entry equals the rate of charge exit. So the rate of accumulation of charge is zero. The summed charge is not the same as the accumulation of charge; the summed charge must include all charge entering and leaving the control volume in the time period.

You have not responded to my first answer.

I can move the goalposts too. What if L is varying? Is this a serious question or a windup?

This is a very important technique in Engineering and you have posted in the Engineering section. What you have is a control volume and your equation is not quite right for n, since they electrons at the start of the period are not the same as the eelctrons at the end ie you have electrons entering and leaving the control volume over the period so the current is the rate of electrons crossing a boundary surface. If you like n = dn/dt (leaving) - dn/dt (entering) this control volume idea is important in Thermodynamics (heat flow) Fluid mechanics Electricity and comes under the heading transport phenomenon. Momentum may be transported as well as mass and heat.

This is just nonsense. Real numbers have what is known as the well ordering property. It is this property that allows us to compare two real numbers as greater than or less than. So my statements are all correct ? Let us see. 1) Division of a number by another number greater than one always results in a smaller number. 5 is greater than 1. Divide -10 by 5. Is the result greater than or smaller than -10? 2) Division of a number by one always results in the original number. Statement is correct by Group Axiom 3. 1 is the identity element. 3) Division of a number by another number less than one, but not equal to zero, always results in a larger number. -10 is less than 1. Divide 5 by -10 Is the result greater than or less than 5?

My original question How many dollars? Your answer one billion Your reply. So you are telling me that if I have one dollar that I can convert it to 1billion dollars by dividing it by one billionth. You are further telling me that you do not understand why this is wrong. I can only suggest that you need to study the process of division more thoroughly. To help here are some further questions to ponder. They are not tricks. These questions can be presented in symbols if you prefer. 1) Division of a number by another number greater than one always results in a smaller number. 2) Division of a number by one always results in the original number. 3) Division of a number by another number less than one, but not equal to zero, always results in a larger number. Are any of the above statements correct?

Pearls, with your full-on approach, you are missing something many here are trying to tease out. Whatever may be wrong in the speculation about linking colour in photographs to specific geographic locations (I think so) but the study of perceived colour can still bear much fruit, especially if conducted scientifically. My approach is to nudge in this direction and try to find out if there are any more modest goals with real scientific value.

Does anyone know what proportion of the energy powering Earth's natural processes comes from Solar flux and what proportion is provided by processes due to the Earth / Moon system and what proportion may be attributed to 'other causes'?

Gosh yes, yet another factor to include. +1 tar.

That is known as over egging the pudding. When I buy bananas there are usually some areas that are not yellow. I still have no trouble differentiating between bananas and smoked haddock by comparing a small sample of the colours. BTW this brings up another point for whatever to ponder. What is the condition of the object to be identified? What if a human were jaundiced?

pzkpfw +1, good link. Since that was such a wildly wrong answer to a simple maths question, I don't see how you hope to tackle the more difficult one you wish to discuss. I have seen University Professors of Mathematics on at least three continents say to you "There may be something in your idea, but it needs putting in proper terminology" and taking great pains and length to try to help you do this whilst you consistently sidestep their patient attempts to help and constantly return to your untenable statements until the good professors have no hair left to pull out.

It would appear that you are already doing what I asked, but with the green leaves I listed as many of the variables (due to measurement technique) that could affect the apparent colour you were measuring as I could quickly think of, and offered a sample of red flowers that provided examples of some of these for discussion. There are many reds and also other colours in those red flowers. So surely the question is a simple one. Which red are you chosing and why? And how do you distinguish from another red flower that has that particular colour simply because it presents at a different angle or age or time of day? I note your expansion zooms on the green leaves above show the anti-aliasing colour changes I referred to. My picture will also show these if zoomed, although I did not post a high definition one to save space. I suggest the following experiments. Prepare a series of images of the same photograph at different resolutions and examine the same area in each with you image program. Good programs will provide infomation about the list /graph of colours present. Does this information change as you change the resolution of the whole photograph? Mike +1 I like your dirty dog picture