Unity+

Well, I don't think they tried to "paint an electron purple", however I think it dealt with the idea that atoms don't touch in a way where they are completely compressed, but are merely connected through forces, which drives the valence electrons of atoms to connect in order for form molecules. However, in this case, theoretically it seems possible to compress them enough where not only the valence electrons come in contact, but the other electrons inside the atom become a part of the event of connection between atoms to form molecules.

I'm not suggesting that magnetism is magic. I am simply providing ideas with some evidence of correlation, and maybe even causality. If I find evidence related to the amount of energy needed then I can provide some(unless Arc finds it first). EDIT: Let's consider the following: http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/spring98/ast1002/sun/ So, from this source(and many other sources) the Sun produces [math]3.9\times 10^{26}[/math] Joules(or Watts per second). Now, from this piece of information, the same amount of energy(assuming that all the energy is in the electromagnetic field of the Sun) would be transferred through the electromagnetic field of the Earth(since we assume that the Earth's and Sun's electromagnetic fields interact with each other), which then is transferred to(if this is correct) the inner core of the Earth. Since the mass of the inner core, made out of both iron, nickle, and sulfur(on small scales), is [math]9.675\times 10^25[/math] grams, at least based on the source below. Please correct me on this if this is incorrect: http://nineplanets.org/earth.html Knowing this information, here is more information. Let us use the following equations of chemistry to determine if it is possible to use the Sun's energy from its electromagnetic field to expand the iron core from the thermal energy. It may seem as if the amount of energy needed is too low for the amount displayed here. However, notice it only takes that amount of energy to increase the temperature from 0 to approximately 38 degrees Celsius. If it were to increase exponentially, the Sun, would in fact, have enough energy to cause the effects referred to in the other post. Now, I will expand on this post to show how much energy is needed to cause thermal expansion in the inner core of the Earth, which would in effect cause movement as stated in the other post.

There are two hypotheses that I have come up with dealing with Aleph integrals. Hypothesis 1: If any Collatzian ratio is chosen for the Aleph integral equation and if the process is carried out for every kind of Collatzian ratio that exists, then for each Aleph integral there would always be a convergence to the value of [math]\sqrt{e}[/math] because this is the proportion for the quantity of matrix solutions of any given Collatz-Matrix equation. The graph of convergence is shown below. Hypothesis 2: Iff the Collatzian ratio of [math]\frac{1}{3}[/math] is chosen for an Aleph integral, then the result will be [math]\sqrt{e}[/math] I will test for each hypothesis. EDIT: Here is something extra that was interesting:

But then how can causation be proved then if the correlation is evident? Maybe the changes in the electromagnetic field and the changes in the Sun's magnetic field be evidence that there is causation? Or could an experiment be conducted where a simulation can be done, where there is an iron core representation that would be affected, according to the hypothesis, where there is an expansion due to the increase in energy of one Tesla coil, leading to the expansion of the iron core representation? It would be an experiment to consider, unless the amount of energy needed would be to drastic.

Well, I can see a correlation between Earthquake activity(movement of plates) and solar activity(which would cause fluctuations in the Sun's electromagnetic field). In these graphs, in can be seen that has Solar activity had increased during 1996 and ongoing and in the same time span there was in increase in the movement of plates, or Earthquake activity. It may not prove directly that the Sun's and Earth's electromagnetic field allow the energy of one to affect the other, but as many would know with two electromagnetic field there is something called the Lorentz Effect(please correct me if I got the wrong name of it) which involves to coils(Tesla coils if you will) which involves the connection of two Tesla coils and their electromagnetic fields. This allows the transfer of energy between the two coils, whether one is powered or not. This can cause one side two gain energy from the other that has an energy source, which is why you can power one object by the interaction between one Tesla coil with no power source and the Tesla coil that does have a power source, which allows the electromagnetic field interaction between the two Tesla coils. The same property and effects could be occurring between the Sun and the Earth, where the Sun is a bigger power source which means the increase in Solar activity(solar flares, Sun spot increases) could be involves in the increase of Earthquake activity because the hypothesis Arc has presented here. Just an idea.

It was merely an example. And, the other definitions merely differ based on context. It is like having different sub classes in a class. The subclasses may be different contexts, but still lie in the same class. a straight line or plane that touches a curve or curved surface at a point, but if extended does not cross it at that point. a completely different line of thought or action Mathematics the trigonometric function that is equal to the ratio of the sides (other than the hypotenuse) opposite and adjacent to an angle in a right-angled triangle They all deal with, in one way or another, a line that either touches a curve or (whatever). They involve one concept, but can be applied to many contexts, if you understand what I am saying.

Let us wait for other experts to analyze the work. Simply one user, like you, who we don't know has an actual degree in geology or geophysics(unless you present the evidence of such) or not and hasn't really, if at all, presented any evidence against the theory. Therefore, simply declaring this theory, or hypothesis if you will, debunked should be left for us all to decide. I feel you have just said most of the time "This theory is wrong because of reasons without evidence or very little evidence that destroys the whole concept." Again, let's wait for others to analyze it so there can be more, serious analysis done by people with either expertise in the field or who have presented enough evidence to make the conclusion that it is either true of false.

Maybe this could be a new source of energy because maybe energy would be released when the pressure is dropped, maybe? This is an interesting new find. I hope it becomes a way to produce green energy.

Here would be another way to write this Aleph integral equation: Because the following is true:

Wait...you are beginning to confuse me.... What do you mean by triangle definition? Tangent has only one definition. It is context that is needed. For example, there is something called the tangent of a circle. However, you are referring to the context of a triangle. There is only one definition of tangent. It is where it is applied that changes everything. Again, based on the information, it depends on whether the calculator your using is set to radians or degrees. I am still confused on what the question is, if this isn't the answer to the right question. Could someone else help me here?

It would depend on what setting you are using on a calculator(if you are just using a calculator to calculate the tangent). If the calculator is set in radians then it will output the value in radians. If it is set to degrees then the output will be degrees. This is if I understand the question correctly.

What do you mean "give you the angle in radians"? And what do you mean in context of y/x? Please explain what you are trying to do.

Well, there can be a simple formula that can be used(depending what you mean by general). [math]n^{2}[/math] Where n is the amount of ones in the value. Do you want an equation where you can enter the actual value containing the ones so it puts it in the square form?

Well, I recently bought a book called Masters Math: Calculus. There is a whole "series" of them ranging from Pre-Algebra to Calculus and I think more. http://www.amazon.com/Master-Math-Debra-Anne-Ross/dp/1598639862 I think this is the book. The cover doesn't look the same as mine, but I'll see if I can find mine online and then post it.

Well, I guess this constant isn't really a new constant, but it is actually the existing constant of e. However, it isn't from the above method. Here is a new type of function called the Aleph Integral, which works differently from the regular integral. Here is another way to denote the Aleph integral: Where [math]d_{c}[/math] is this Collatzian ratio. How this works is you have a Collatz-Matrix equation that starts with the x of n and is of dimensions k and d(found in the integral of a). Knowing this, the amount of matrix solutions for a specific Collatz-Matrix equation is the value inputted into the solution. Then, divide the value of n by the amount of matrix solutions for that particular Collatz-Matrix equation. Then, repeat the process by increase the dimensions until the dimensions magnitude has equaled the value of y. EDIT: Also, b denotes position of the initial x. An interesting thing is that the following is true: I will be looking into this further. Here are a few rules Aleph integrals: Here is a popular equation that is fitted for this type of integral:

Wait, why did you quote my post? I don't see the response to what I said in the post.

I just noticed that it displays the code when you click the latex code. Oops. I can see where it could become a problem.

I was thinking, could there be an implementation of a feature where when a user posts a post with a Latex equation and if the equation is wrong(let's say people make minor errors without knowing it) and instead of having to make a post saying the mistake in the equation the user who sees the error can just click on the code(or some other mechanism) in the post and edit it from there and give reasoning to why it was edited. Of course, the user who edits it must be a certain rank, but it would save posts. I don't know if it would be possible, but it is an idea.

Could you link an article to this? This seems quite interesting to me.

Well, I have been searching for Mathematical movies, but there are so few it disappoints me. I wish hollywood would start considering the base of people who think mathematical topics and themes would be entertaining. But anyways, Travelling Salesman(even though I haven't watched it) is one of my favorites.

I think we are just getting worked up over some troll who claims this site is too oppressive. You know how only crackpots claim oppression?

The reason why Black Holes are black is because light can't escape it, not because of dark photons(unless proven otherwise).

It turned out that the number was already tested not to be a prime.

I think that could be applicable in some ways of being negative.