studiot

I did not see that post, but it is an interesting (and likeable) way of putting it. +1 Does your presentation run to including any form of uncertainty principle? Your exposition above was completely definite.

Have you studied Banach's contraction mapping theorem? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach_fixed-point_theorem

One of the things any successful apprentice has to learn is that machinery of any kind, including computers, is completely unforgiving as it follows the immutable laws of physics. No amount of bluster or cat calling will make a poorly serviced motor or ill programmed computer run well.

Are you extracting the Michael? I'm sorry I thought you said your were studying or working in computers. exp is computer language for exponential.

Strong feelings or not I prefer a civil discussion. And discussion is two way. I can't proceed if I don't know what you think about isotropy and homogeneity (do you know the difference?) to start with.

Rest mass = 0 The function y = {exp(x) - 1} starts and zero and becomes asymptototic to infinity without problem.

Questionist, strong language for scientific discussion. The underlying principle behind special relativity (do you know enough to distinguish between Einstein's two relativity theories and also the Newton/ Galileo one?) is that we wish to assert the homogeneity and the isotropy of space or spacetime or whatever we like to call the 'universe'.

Yes I have this problem from a bog standard Toshiba laptop Windows with Windows 7. Try Fox or Chrome.

Thar's a bit abrupt, I was wondering if you realised the implications of that statement. However, according to WolframAlpha yes that is the correct plane. To check, input the determinant as follows matrix {{x,y,z,1},{1,-2,0,1},{1,-2,2,1},{0,3,2,1}}

Is the coefficient of z truly zero?

To do what you ask you need to go back in the analysis to the opoint where the equations of motion are mgcos(&) - T = -ml(d&/dt)2 -mgsin(&) = ml(d2&/dt2) Your equation is the second one. Multiply this by (d&/dt) and integrate 0.5ml(d&/dt)2 = mgcos(&) + Constant Apply boundary condition for when & = 0 and solve. Edit sorry for using & instead of theta but I don't have my usual stuff available.

My first question would be are you going to create the cyclic ketone before or after the nitrogen bridge?

What did you want potassium nitrate for and how much did you intend to make, may I ask?

Exactly.

Can't wait to find out, so do tell when you know. PS I can recommend a good shelter for the homeless if she throws you out.

I think you misunderstand what I mean. In tech drawing and differential geometry we can open out the surface of a cylinder (map it) to a plane because it has zero thickness. As soon as we have a rectangular parallelepiped of substance the thickness becomes important when we bend it in any way. I could add a 'transition curve' to the junction of each wrap in my series solution and also calculate for the centreline or mean radius but that would add complications of higher order, small in overall effect but large in difficulty.

The volume of the stack will not match the volume between the two cylinders exactly.

Because if part of it is stretched, or more difficult- compressed, then its volume and surface area changes.

Unfortunately you cannot roll the paper round a cylinder without distortion if it has any thickness whatsoever. In order to force it to lie 'flat' (contiguous) one side must be longer than the other.

Furthermore , R, Cv and the quantity of gas are all given in engineer's units (kg- somethings) so n is not needed.

The point is that if the internal energy depends only upon temperature and temperature does not change then the internal energy does not change. That is dU = 0. That is q = -w = RT ln(V2/V1) = RT ln(P1/P2) Which is an expanded version of the formula scott's tutor provided.

We are assuming an ideal gas. Which brings us to the dreaded first law and internal energy. The internal energy of an ideal gas depends only upon the temperature. At the very beginning, swansont asked you what isothermal means. So what are the implications of this being an isothermal process?

+1 And whatsmore he was doing the usual misdirection ie he was looking at the wrong variables at the wrong point.

I noted that the actual curve is not a true spiral or any regular curve.

OK I now have 8thou after arithmetic correction by my series method, which is really also quite simple. Since imatfaal has posted a valid method (I like it +1) here is mine.