studiot

Many folks have trouble with this because they fail to distinguish between negative numbers and subtraction as a process. Multiplication is not addition or subtraction they are different. Negative numbers are examples of signed numbers. That is numbers with a value and a sign. So the number 5 just has a value (5) The signed number -5 has both a value (5) and a sign -. Again forget any examples involving bank balances for this, they are not helpful. Instead think of your electricity bill. If you have 5 amps flowing we identify the direction by using a sign. So 5 amps flowing from your solar panel to the grid is +5amps; and 5amps flowing into your system is -5amps. Voltage can be reckoned the same way. And power is current times voltage. So the rules multiplication rules are plus times plus or minus times minus makes plus minus times plus or plus times minus makes minus. Using this on our power calculator we have Your voltage is plusV your power is (+5)x(+V) ie positive if you are supplying the grid = +5V watts : So they owe you money and your power is (-5)x(+V) ie negative if the grid is supplying you ie -5Watts : So you owe them money. Sorry did I say forget the bank? It seems they always get you in the end.

I think you guys need to consider when and how did the oceans get there, before discussing 'oceanic crust'. Also what was meant by "the crust was immobile?"

Noting also the the OP is offering 1 hour per day (per subject for 7 years) that would imply an undergraduate spends only 2 hours per day on her Batchelor's degree! More realistic figures I have heard are 10,000 hours study for most subjects at tertiary level, whether they are academic (eg maths) or practical (eg mechanical apprentiship).

That depends upon what you understand a singularity to be and also what you intend to do with it.

Thank you , ajb, I will think about this.

I am not familiar with the differential geometry of more than 3 dimensions so perhaps you would care to comment on the following thought. I agree about the definition of curvature, as in 3D there are two separate (independent) curvatures. Spacetime is, of course, a minimum of 4D.

I would very seriously think about this before proceeding. Relativity is much more reliant on mathematics than your other interest, Quantum Mechanics, and much harder to make 'everyday' without the necessary grounding in ordinary mechanics. So can you say that you know enough about ordinary mechanics to appreciate relativity?

You need first to calculate the total solids, but I am not clear what the units of your organic carbon content are. Then I suggest you calculate the partition coefficient, Kp whichdivides this up between the phases, following the priocedure in this Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) document http://www.epa.gov/superfund/remedytech/tsp/download/issue6.pdf

Since you are interested in Chirality, please not that the term covers more phenomena than just left v right handed -ness.

I suppose there is no reason a chemistry student (is this a chemistry problem?) would know what the standard human body temperature is, though I would think it handy information for anyone. How about 37oC? But watch the two traps in your gas equation.

This book give the most fascinating story of the first use of chirality in explaining the poisoning of an entire town in Germany. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chasing-Molecule-Discovering-Building-Blocks/dp/0750933461

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31711446 Happy chatting

Gosh I really screwed up that post didn't I? Apologies all round.

Good morning MayIKnow and congratulations for hanging in there with reasoned discussion about your points. So much better than many who come here to ‘discuss’ an idea. +1 I did put up (post#32) a list of properties designed to find out which ones you have some knowledge of, but there has been so much activity in this thread, perhaps you missed it? Anyway to continue the story, I like your bucket of leaves analogy but you (and everyone else) has so far missed one thing from my list. Filtering. Suppose you had a supersnail that threw away every red leaf or every other leaf or every wet leaf? That would also reduce the size of the task. We filter out most of our sensory input. We do not feel or hear out footfall or our clothes moving against our body. We only notice temperature if it goes up or down dramatically and so on. Now I also mentioned the spatial distribution. We receive sound from all around us, but we filter out much of this. Particularly if our other senses tell us that the sound or its source are of no consequence. Whilst standing safely on the pavement we can hold a conversation, ignoring the roar of the traffic we can see passing by. But when we step into the roadway we become sensitive to traffic sounds from behind and the side. Transients again. I note the paper quoted by Acme refers to transients. It also refers to one way how our sensory system can get around physical transmission limits such as Shannon’s theorem and the uncertainty principle is waves. This will lead to a discussion of buffering and multiplexing, but I will leave tha till next time. There is, of course, a second aspect to spatial distribution. Our sense of hearing is binaural – we hear in stereo. Again I will leave the detail till next time. A final observation. Some of the processing is done in the physical world by physical processes. Some is done in the mental world by software processes. Just like a computer.

Well it would be. Look very carefully at your calculation for the area of the stopper.

Since no one else will bother to answer, I will make the following observation, though I don't really feel inclined after your response to my last attempt to help. You will find limited reference to the theorem you refer to since it has largely been superceded by Cauchy contour integration. The technique is sound, but the problem is of determining the coefficients of the series representing the inverse function. References are Titchmarsh : The Theory of Functions Copson : The Theory of Functions of a Complex Variable Fort : Infinite Series All from Oxford University Press

@Charon Y My last post was really addressed to MayIknow, although I am happy to discuss this subject with anyone. I'm sure you understand most if not all the terms I listed, but I don't want a discussion to go over the OP's head because he doesn't know something basic. Meanwhile a couple of points. You seem to be concentrating on successful transmission of significant quantities of high grade data. A new born baby receives at least as much signal as an older human, but cannot resolve it into intelligible signal. Doing this is part of the story. Sometimes the simple absence or presence of a sound, rather than its exact nature, is all that matters. Hence my focus on transients. A dramatic demonstation that carrier wave speed has little to do with successful steady state data transmission appears in electromagetically carried signals. All EM waves travel at the same speed. AM radio can convey continuous speech and poor quality music. FM radio can convey high quality music. Neither would convey information fast enough to run an internet connection. Frequencies used in DAB (digital audio broadcasting) and PSB (public service broadcasting - wifi-) can carry significant quantities of internet data, including enough for video. Microwaves and EM Signals in optical fibres can carry sunstantial numbers of such channels simultaneously The ELF (extra low frequency) radio signals transmitted to submarines can only signals as coded individual words, like the old teletype, with speeds measured in minutes per word (not words per minute) All these signals travel at the speed of light, but the capacity varies enormously with frequency. Nevertheless the speed of an on/off transient is the same for all these signals.

Thank you for that correction sensei +1

The editor seems to be working now so I can make a more coherent post. There are a number of (not difficult, some even self evident) terms and ideas that need to be brought together to discuss this subject more thoroughly. Steady state conditions Transient conditions The distinction between the information signal and the carrier (wave) and the use of the word 'signal' Shannon's theorem [math]M = {\left( {1 + \frac{P}{N}} \right)^{TW}}[/math] Buffers Filters and filtering Noise, signal and signal to noise Multiplexing Spatial signal distribution The relationship between wave speed, wavelength and frequency The last one plus Shannon's theorem is very important since they show that successful steady state continuous transmission of information is dependent not on the wave speed, but on the frequency of the carrier. These apply to both biological and artificial systems including audio, radio and computer signals. Let me know what you want me to expand on and what you are comfortable with

High School Quantum theory? Well this is also very important to chemists as well as physicists and their presentation is rather less heavy and math reliant. So my I suggest you get along to your library and look in the chemistry section under General Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, Inorganic Chemistry and I'm sure you will find much of interest. I am less familiar with american volumes but General Chemisty by Ralph Petrucci is digestible. A british book from Cambridge University would be really good if you can find it The Quantum Universe by Hey and Walters. This covers QM for both Chemistry and Physics and more. Enjoy your studies.

When you start chemistry you will discover that acid resistance is more complicated (and therefore interesting). John Cuthber was talking about hydroflouric acid, which is the strongest acid, but it will not dissolve certain metals. To dissolve gold you need a mixture called aqua regia, which is not stronger the hydroflouric. https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&source=hp&q=aqua+regia&gbv=2&oq=aqua+regia&gs_l=heirloom-hp.3..0l10.875.3016.0.4266.10.10.0.0.0.0.172.1063.5j5.10.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.10.1063.bUHpyAem4PI I can't answer for polymers, I'll leave that to the professional polymer chemists here, but hydroflouric acid used to be supplied in rubber bottles because it attacks glass. If this is for a school project then go to a local flooring company and ask them. There are many fancy artificial polymers that have been developed specifically for acid resistance in industrial flooring. Get some manufacturers' names and ring their technical departments, I'm sure they will also be glad to help. Another complication is catalysis. Many polymers are quite stable until a catalyst is added to a particular relaively weak acid. The catalyst then allows the acid to break down the polymer. Nature uses this extensively (there are many natural important polymers in biology) and has 'developed' enzymes for just this purpose. Incidentally 'polymer' is just a term for multiple units of the same chemical structure joined together. The number of units does not have to be large or man made. Large numbers are often called 'high polymers' and made made ones 'synthetic high polymers'. This is all meant to be value added general background and I wish you and exciting and fruitfull entry into the study of Chemistry.

I'm sorry but neither of you are talking any sense of physics that I can understand, and repetition does not make it any clearer. You need to find and use the correct words if others are going to understand you.

The OP was right, there is a long term transmission bottleneck due to mismatch of transmission speed. The best speed attainable is obviously that of the slowest link in the chain. This must result in information loss during sustained transmission. Hence my point about our auditory system being sensitive to change, which is short term. Note that I am using physics rather than biology (which you are far more expert in than I) and continuing that theme, I mentioned music. The above is rather similar the the (IMHO sneaky) american method of rating audio power amplifiers in terms of 'music power'. The american method rates the amplifier at power levels it can only attain for milliseconds and cannot possibly sustain. This allows the advertisers to claim hugely unrealistic power output ratings. This has some justification in that much of music depends on sudden large amplitude changes that only last for short periods. So just like our auditory system is fast enough for sudden large (important) changes, so the amplifier can respond correctly to say a drum.

So why is it so unreasonable for me to say I don't understand why it doesn't matter Or what it doesn't matter to. Nor do I reaaly know what you the OP means by an explosion. An explosion, in scientific terms, is a reaction, chemical or nuclear, that follows certain well defined mathematical reaction kinetic equations. There are several to choose from. Equally it follows certain equally well defined thermodynamic equations in terms of the progress of the reaction front. None of these equations contain gravitational terms. If the OP wishes to discuss these I would expect to see these equations stated with additional terms to cover whatever gravitational effect is proposed. Instead I see some waffle about wells. In fact explosion reactions may be expected to be influenced by external gravitational fields, both the reactants and products will be subject to this. Even gamma rays produced by a nuclear reaction will be influenced by a gravitational field (whether strongly enough to be significant is another matter).