Unity+

Earlier, String Theory had gotten much more attention and now(as I know of) it seems to have less of acknowledgment. Is there a reason for this?

Everything in the world has its risks, whether at the smallest level or the largest scale. Determining the level of this is the significance.

Again, these cases only apply to processed meat, as stated before in other topics dealing with this.

Well, with my fascination of the Collatz conjecture, I might as well test other things with it. When I combined some concepts to make one. So, here is what I am presenting: Pretty much what this notation is presenting is that using the Hailstone sequence, sum the reciprocals of all the numbers of the hailstone sequence, besides 1, to a get a solution. My conjecture here is that the summation will always have a high bound 3(unsure about a lower bound). I have tested with many numbers and haven't found a counter example, though larger numbers may present different results. Another part of the conjecture is if the solution can get close to 3, but never reach 3, then that means all sequences are finite.

Yes, I misunderstood. My bad. Well, at least that is clarified. Thank you.

Ah, you have an unsolved problem that actually may be added to the list. In order to solved this problem, we would need to find if there are infinitely many twin primes because using calculus we can determine that: [math]u_{n}\left ( p_{1} \right )=\lim_{p_{1} \to \infty }\frac{p_{1}}{p_{1}-1}=1[/math] [math]u_{n}\left ( p_{2} \right )=\lim_{p_{2} \to \infty }\frac{p_{2}}{p_{2}-1}=1[/math] In order for this to work, both have to be only 1 difference apart. In order to determine this to be true, we would have to prove that there infinitely many twin primes with a difference of 1. EDIT: Could you clarify why you did "0.25 = (3/2)2 - 2"? Also, if you proved this conjecture before the twin prime conjecture, you would have proven the twin prime conjecture because this conjecture requires the twin prime conjecture to be solved.

We don't know the thoughts of other species therefore we cannot determine if this is true(yet).

I would most likely have to add an option to take a group you create and make it so if this group is a family group then you can change the settings so that your precise position would only be available to them.

I don't know why this was down voted, so I up voted. It is an actual concern that was brought up by another person I talked to(irl) when discussing the idea with him/her. But I don't see it being a different issue from Facebook. Also, it wouldn't be exact locations. It would just be estimates.

Since I have been trying to think of a project work on, I was wondering if people think it would be good to combine UrtheCaste with social networking? Since UrtheCaste gives images of different places on Earth, I was thinking of making a social network where the profiles appear in the location on the Earth in the social network where that person lives. This would give insight into what is going on around the person without having to first open their profile page. Then, if a person finds something interesting in the area located near that person then they can open that person's profile page and see if there are people talking about it. There is more to the idea, but does this sound like a good idea? EDIT: And yes I may get a hold of the UrtheCaste API(which is awesome ).

Well, most of my free time is done doing my own research in the first place. (Yes, I am that guy). For me, what happens most of the time is I make a chart of my day for each week and each month and then what happens is things change.

I have been asking many people and half of them say yes and others say no. I have been confused on this and it begins to make me stressed about entering college.

I am going for a computer science major in college and I was wondering if I will be able to do my own research(independent research) within college. Will I have enough time to do it? Or is college really that restrictive?

Just because there may be no other theory doesn't mean yours will be accepted...

Well, I am trying to make a concept, mathematically, of this idea, and here is what I got. Given an algorithm A there exists the Big-O(which is the representation of efficiency of a given algorithm, simply put http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation). [math]A(x)\in O(g(x))[/math] There are many possibilities that could occur within this concept, which is either that the other algorithms that branch off from algorithm A have Big-O's that add up to the Big-O of algorithm A or are the product of, or both? Either that, whatever combination of functions of Big-O to get the function of the original Big-O. [math]O(\delta) = \sum_{n=1}^{k}O(\delta _{n})=O(\delta _{1})+O(\delta _{2})+...O(\delta _{n})[/math] [math]O(\delta) = \prod_{n=1}^{k}O(\delta _{n})=O(\delta _{1})\times O(\delta _{2})\times ...O(\delta _{n})[/math] [math]O(\delta) = \sum_{n=1}^{k}O(\delta_{n} )\pm \prod_{n=1}^{k}O(\delta _{n})[/math] Of course, this assumes that this conjecture is correct, which is that there is a conservation of information(?) when dealing with the break down of algorithms to their simpler form.

What I meant was the numbers from one part of mathematics can represented in geometric form(picture form), whether or not it was intended for geometry. However, somethings(such as complex numbers) can only be represented with geometries that are outside the norm.

Another issue is how we can determine if the film is either real or if it is just CGI effects. That is the main issue with credibility of UFO sightings. If there is no image or photography then your not considered credible. If you do get photography, there have been so many ploys that they aren't believable anymore.

I don't know if you were being serious... Theoretically, any form of mathematics can be represented as a particular set of geometry, whether it be the known form of geometries or unknown. It is an interesting question dealing with whether the numbers are separate from the geometry or if they are conjoined together.

A conjecture would be that a proposition is presented that has examples of it being true(the examples being evidence). For example, the 3x+1 problem has examples of it being true. This proposition has examples of it being true in some form(whether directly or indirectly).But, it could just be a musing.

But that is why this would be considered a conjecture.

I think this improves my point because that means there are multiple ways to represent 1 in other bases.

What math are you looking for?

Can you show me the example in work?