Xittenn

The divisors of 24 are 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 the relative primes for each divisor are 1 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 5 1, 3, 5, 7 1, 5, 7, 11 1, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23 the totient of each divisor is the sum of the relative primes and the sum of the totients is n which in this case is 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 8 = 24

Anything I say here will be said with the assumption of no prior knowledge as I have no idea what your level of programming is. I am also simply giving my opinion on how this could be approached based on my own experience. 1) Matlab has a framework for object oriented programming and this is probably a good time to start using it 2) You have several different objects here - objects of mass m - spring objects - physics objects some might say that the spring object and the physics object could be one but I usually keep them separate. It is best to instantiate one spring for every two masses that are connected together. 3) Each object requires certain properties with exception to the physics object. The physics object will simply define how two masses will interact with one spring. The spring object, if it is not a fixed object, will require the definition of several properties. The first property to define will be k which is your spring rate constant. If it is not fixed it will also require a matrix representing its position, its velocity can be represented by a vector and a scalar. You will probably also want to define a property that is a measure of its current state of compression. This last bit is particularly important as when you increment per frame status, which is what I was getting from your statements on the discontinuity and differential with respect to the select states of three objects, you will probably want to factor in this information. This is also a good place to define which two masses are being joined by which spring ie. connection_a = mass_01 connection_b = mass_02 The mass object will, as the spring object, define a location matrix and a vector and scalar defining velocity. This is all this object will probably define. 4) The two objects, the spring and the mass, will require the definition of some get and set functions. Essentially what these will allow you to do is access the current state via the physics object, make the relevant calculations and then set the new appropriate values. The physics object will define several methods that a main routine will be able to call and it will actively execute your algorithm on the current spring object in queue(the one you pass in.) I say call the spring object as this also contains the information in regards to which masses are being acted on as defined above in 3. The proper combination or approach mathematically will depend on your system and I really didn't understand how you were defining your system in your OP. 5) Define a routine that loops over your array of springs and that calls the physics object to apply the relevant computation on the values. As always I apologize ahead of time if I misunderstood anything or if I am not making sense or if I simply haven't answered your question. I hope someone can help you in any case, this sounds like a really fun project

Would that have accounted for elements like Li where it is denoted by two letters. Not that this would be any more difficult to add, in that one would simply have to note the locations of letters that are not capitals. Or search based on a library of known elements!

I guess the follow through is proving by replacement that [math] y \in t \rightarrow y \not\in s [/math] given the pair [math] y(in \; replacement) = \lbrace s, t \rbrace [/math]. This said then [math] \forall s (s = A) \forall t (t = B)(A \cup B) [/math] is a set by a proof already given 5.19 iii) and using power set to tie it all together. This seems a bit convoluted to me and I will have to reevaluate the steps. Still uncertain. :/

Hi I'm having trouble with this proof. I'm not sure if I did the first part right and how I should use the second part properly. I am following the hint in the book to use the Axiom of Replacement to prove step three below and follow through with Replacement and Union to finalize the proof. 1) Prove that the Cartesian Product of two sets is a set [math] A \times B = \left \{ \left \langle u, v \right \rangle \mid u \in A \land v \in B \right \} [/math] 2) Taking the Axiom of Replacement [math] \forall u \forall v \forall w \left ( \psi \left ( u, v \right ) \land \psi \left ( u, w \right ) \rightarrow v = w \right ) \rightarrow \forall z \exists y \forall v \left ( v \in y \leftrightarrow \left ( \exists u \in z \right ) \psi \left ( u, v \right ) \right ) [/math] 3) First prove that the following is a set [math] \forall x \left ( \lbrace \langle x, y \rangle \mid y \in t \rbrace \right ) [/math] 4) Taking (1) from Section 6 [math] \langle x, y \rangle = \langle u, v \rangle \iff x = u \land y = v [/math] 5) Use then this u and v for the Axiom of Replacement reduced to the following where v is unique [math] \forall z \exists y \forall v \left ( v \in y \leftrightarrow \left ( \exists u \in z \right ) \psi \left ( u, v \right ) \right ) [/math] 6) [math] \forall t \left ( t \in y \right ) [/math] and [math] z = \langle x, y \rangle [/math] [math] \forall \langle x, y \rangle \exists t \forall v \left ( v \in t \leftrightarrow \left ( \exists u \in \langle x, y \rangle \right ) \langle u, v \rangle \right ) [/math] Hence [math] y \in t [/math] proving that [math] \forall x \left ( \lbrace \langle x, y \rangle \mid y \in t \rbrace \right ) [/math] is a set by the Axiom of Replacement 7) Now taking the Axiom of Union [math] A \cup B = \lbrace x \mid x \in A \lor x \in B \rbrace [/math] 8) And the Axiom of Replacement [math] \forall u \forall v \forall w \left ( \psi \left ( u, v \right ) \land \psi \left ( u, w \right ) \rightarrow v = w \right ) \rightarrow \forall z \exists y \forall v \left ( v \in y \leftrightarrow \left ( \exists u \in z \right ) \psi \left ( u, v \right ) \right ) [/math] 9) And prove that the Cartesian Product of two sets is a set [math] A \times B = \left \{ \left \langle u, v \right \rangle \mid u \in A \land v \in B \right \} [/math] If there is something I can make more clear that would allow others to more easily aid me let me know. :|

Is this on Linux that you are using the IDE? Rating out of 10? As I'm sure you are aware(just making my point clear) hardware often comes with features that generic drivers do not implement. Installing the goods can often be a pain and occasionally there doesn't even exist such a solution. There are a lot of varietals of OS to be trying to write a driver for each and everyone and I can't see a market for open source hardware any time soon. The fact that third parties are jumping in and doing the dirty work is great but you are relying not only on their existence but also on their expertise and ability to produce quality on no budget with you as a tester. side note: Fedora is working pretty ok for me so far for the limited purpose of Rosetta Commons which is fine by me ....

The following is not advice on how to solve this problem directly. Maybe it would be easier for you to understand if you first chose a vertice and translated it to the origin followed by rotating the vertices so that the prism would sit aligned to the axis. This would naturally require some extra work on your part but might allow you to more clearly see the answer for yourself. It may also help you to visualize this if you do it in a 3D modeling studio, but again these are just ideas.

Well thanks for the feedback guys and thanks for the kind words zapatos. I'm probably just reading too deep into things and over analyzing, I do that sometimes. It is probably a cause of my present math rut and current inability to start interesting conversations. I'm an orange and a green which tends towards inner conflict especially when I am constantly struggling to intersperse more blue and gold; just sayin'.

I avoided this in my op intentionally as I am one of the most awkward persons you will ever meet. I'm not nerdy awkward, I'm the kind of awkward that is when it is simply uncomfortable to interact. This is why my knowing the intent of the forum is helpful and I know I'm not the only one in this position. If I know the intent then it is easier for me to filter between what is my awkwardness and what is inappropriate to the situation. or put another way .... My presence has a tendency to bring out the negative in others, I can really piss people off, I often raise defenses in others and I can also become quite frustrated and upset myself. I can't always tell when I'm out of line and when I'm just outside of what is expected. I just want to find an appropriate place to do what it is I want to do and not be subject to scrutiny for being an outsider. You might not worry about things like this Lemur but I like to make friends with the people I am routinely involving myself with. Finding a place where I fit in and am properly in bounds is for me important and so I raised the issue, I wasn't clear on the intent of the forum. I'm not posting hurt feelings, I'm just reflecting on my activity and how it is and is not appropriate here and also presenting thoughts that may increase the ease of flow here and everywhere, if deemed necessary. I like to think that where there is a need a solution can be formulated to meet the demand, but no solution can be formulated if the need is not presented clearly. Even if there is no solution or will to find one well, under the context, at worst I am in the wrong place and I continue on looking for somewhere more appropriate. Some members here have been so for almost a decade, I'm sure they stuck around because they felt more intimately bound. I haven't yet felt this way here but I see the potential and I try to fit in.

I have never been too fond of outputting textual info to a console as it rarely serves any real purpose and can be difficult when it comes to manipulating large data sets that one might wish to output. In my opinion fstream is much more useful and for educational purposes provides much more insight into how tasking is accomplished within this language.

[edit] I must apologize it is clearly stated in the rules [edit] Hi! I have been coming here for some time now and I must say I am still uncertain about whether or not I'm in the right place. I would like to start by saying of all the forums the physical organization of the forum is by far the most comforting place on the web for science related discussions. My suggestion here though is that maybe a statement of intent would help potential frequenters understand what it is they are attempting to become a part of. I often get mixed feelings about the place and although no direct comments have been made I have interpreted certain comments as possibly having meaning between the lines that may suggest my being out of place. On account of this I have come and gone a number of times and I think if a statement of intent was made on the forums behalf that maybe a more informed decision could be made in this regard. What I am looking for in a forum? Well I came here looking for a place to freely discuss science. I really hoped to find a community where individuals who, educated or not, freely engaged in scientific discussions. When I make these statements I am fully aware of what the difference is between science, pseudo-science and speculations and I hope that from what I have posted I have demonstrated some understanding of this. The important parts in my statements here are that I am looking for a place that anyone can participate in discussions no matter what their personal level of knowledge is and people to do this with. I am not College or University level educated but I do love science and I wish to be a part of a community that promotes learning even if it is not the most ideal of situations. I hoped to find a place that was not intended for the sole purpose of aiding those in the process of becoming educated in the arts of science through accredited institutions. There is, and obviously so, nothing wrong with a forum that promotes proper education and whose intents fall under this last statement, but this is a place that I would not fit into because there is a good chance that I will never be one of these people. What I am seeing? I see a place where discussions are being freely held but not necessarily promoted. I often feel that it is mostly inappropriate to engage in discussions if I am not at a level where I have mastered such knowledge and I exercise extreme caution in not saying anything that would possibly be misconstrued as an attempt to make myself look like I am saying something that is A) of my own device and B) that is being stated from a professional standpoint; I am not a professional, I do not claim to be one and there is a good chance I will never be one. This said I still wish to find a forum where I am welcome to freely take part in discussions and that where if something I were to say was wrong it would be corrected for the sake of betterment of the knowledge of all those participating and not as a means of eliminating myself as a presence within such a discussion. The point? If this is a homework and studies forum that is geared towards aiding individuals who are presently growing within a given field or extend the previous to a place where professionals also come to discuss their thoughts on ideas with professional being key or if this truly is a place that enables a large group of individuals who wish to freely discuss science to do so, well I think a mission statement might clarify the board owners and staffs intent! Such knowledge would help, at least for me, in determining whether or not the individuals activities are appropriate inside of this establishment. Thank you for allowing me to be a part of what has happened here so far. If I am in the wrong place well, I do hope to see some of the individuals here maybe in the right place should I ever get there. Sincerely, BekaD

Visual Studio Express is just a set of programming tools that perform for the languages C#, C++, Visual Basic and a suite for Web Dev and that run under the Visual Studio IDE. Although there are Integrated Development Environments for both Linux and Windows operating systems Visual Studio is largely considered to be far superior to all of the others. This can be attributed to Intellisense which can pre-compile code while you are programming thereby allowing you greater knowledge of the mistakes you may have made and also information on what it is that has been coded. The property pages are also very well laid out and versatile being easily modified to suit ones needs. It is a great IDE to use if you are a beginner and just learning and as you progress you will also develop the knowledge of the underlying structure that is being applied outside of the environment. Obviously there are alternatives and some will say they are better. There is no other IDE that has the reputation that Visual Studio does and although I am more than content with Microsoft it would be nice to have a true competitor on the Linux platform in this category. I'm sorry but this is definitely a fail on the Linux end. Some will suggest that coding should not be done in an IDE for reasons of inefficiency, I don't agree. There are times when coding quickly is best suited to the job and times when complexity does not permit such an approach and each style needs to be weighted independently. Linux programmers tend to require and tend to focus on speed techniques as a good deal of their activities revolve around trying to take over the world and to the bringing about of the downfall of the corporate empire(sorry I had to.)

If this is a simple yes or no question, the answer is most definitely yes. All 'Reaction Orders' are determined by the 'Mechanisms' which guide them. Reaction rates can be modeled under a set of formulas that are established in the field of Kinetics( disambiguation: Chemical Kinetics.) These formulas are developed over several chapters and can be found at several levels in various texts. Off the top of my head there is no one precise equation that can be given here to answer your question. Texts that may cover such information include texts on Chemical Kinetics, Physical Chemistry, Organic and Inorganic Chemistry. The mathematics involved in 'Rate Laws', from what I have studied, tends to be non-complex in form, and yet, the complexity of the information being handled can be overwhelming. A more precise and transparent scenario would allow for a more precise answer and certain individuals may more readily aid you. The best I can do is assemble a response from reference material based on given situations.

I think the brief answer to this question is Linear Independence as defined by Linear Algebra, which is the same as and is taken for granted when we regard [math] R^3 [/math] space.

You already did the hard part, which was formulating an algorithm for 'Half Or Triple Plus One' using modulus! To keep count of the steps well, declare a variable before the while loop and set it equal to zero. Each time you enter the while loop increment the variable by one. Habitually I name a variable like this i, for index although this can be considered bad practice as the name should be more descriptive and be such that it is not readily confused with another i. When you have reached the desired value of 1 use a break statement. while true: if n==1: break For your condition of having an 'array' of numbers simply declare the array and inside the while wrap your algorithm in a 'for loop' like so: for index in range( 0, size_array ) place algorithm here... I think this is all you are asking .... Oh and for an array you will only want to break when they all reach 1 .... which should be pretty simple for you Bruce

I am looking at studying Monte Carlo Methods as a means of sampling natural phenomena which this would fall under. I haven't yet so I can't be more precise in any details that I could give. As to why there would be disorder in periodicity, I would think this would be a cause of any number of parameters which include changes in environment and the availability of specimen dependent resources to changes in specimen articulation as a cause of breeding patterns or evolution(all of which as stated under system dependent terminological variation.)

If all attempts are being made to optimize would binary coded decimal truly be appropriate?

You mean this, or was there something more you are looking for? This assumes you have the data specifications for your heat exchanger, calculating these values is somewhat more complicated but is also pretty well documented online(having just gone through a good deal of it myself :/.)

Wouldn't it suffice to have a base system represented by atoms, their isotopes, electron configuration and incorporating entanglement in some fashion? Light could be used to 'flip-flop' electron configurations in atoms given a proper medium to buffer such a state. I'm pretty sure there are far more compact forms than electron-positron pairs binary that wouldn't be too difficult a constraint; hypothetically speaking of course. Converting bases with these large numbers is a problem and I would have to write my own software should I wish to present any real data on the matter.

The big issue here is coupling. If the object being towed is not readily coupled by a device such as this, to achieve enough backwards scattering force to tow it will result in vaporization. The coupling device will have to be specialized and not just a surface to shoot at, whatever the object may be. My opinion ...

I don't see how you could tractor the moon with this. If the beam was emitted at the moons surface it would at best kick up a lot of dust. If a harness was developed to pull the moon and the device was made ready for such a tractoring configuration, then maybe. This would be one really big harness though!

If I may? I made a really horrible drawring; forgive any presumptions or errors on my part. 1) There is a potential E between any two electrons at distance r 2) If you halve this distance you double this stored potential 3) A cloud of electrons occupying a volume will have, at a point of reference, a measurable voltage(E) 4) If you were to halve the electrons in this cloud but the remaining were to occupy the same volume of space you would halve the potential 5) If the volume containing this half quantity were then halved you would have the same potential as in 3) 6) If you connected 3) and 4) by wire you would have the difference between the two potentials Now the clouds in 6) would be affected by each other also and measurably at a proper distance. The two clouds would effectively repel just like a pith-ball thingy and there would be an incurred stored potential that would increase continuously as they approached one another. Note the difference between the potential given by connecting the two clouds by wire and that of bringing the two clouds together.

The second one draws parallels to this brain teaser(or observation that was so gracefully opened in puzzles), where this is just a hint that may help you. I was just goating him to find the answers because really when you see them they are pretty simple, sorry if I seemed rude.

Voltage is a measure of 'Electric Potential' which is just as you stated a potential based on the quantity of any two charges, not necessarily a +/- pair, at a set distance(when regarded as a static potential.) I think the issue you may be having is in your frame of reference where you are trying to apply the concept to the externalized system as opposed to internalizing it. The voltage measured is that potential created internally and between the two charges separated by the dielectric and/or whatnot; think in terms of a charged capacitor. Also note that as a battery is drained voltage drops proportionately until the potential becomes too low for the battery to be of any use. I am expecting a few replies in this thread

Nickel Titanium NiTi