Endercreeper01

Do you want someone on science forums to explain it to you? Or do you want a website?

1. It is only in several states at once if it is not observed. In fact, if a particle is not observed (not interacting with other quantum systems) it has a probability of being in any position. There is something called the wave function, represented by [latex]\psi (x)[/latex]. The wave function is a function such that [latex]\int_a^b \psi (x) \psi^* (x) dx [/latex] is the probability of observing the particle between position a and b, where [latex]\psi^* (x)[/latex] is the complex conjugate of [latex]\psi (x)[/latex]. When a particle is observed, the wave function collapses and you observe the particle as being in a certain position. The wave function is basically a function describing the quantum system and how it behaves. The wave function can be a function of space, time, or both. There is also a momentum wave function represented by [latex]\phi (p, t)[/latex]. The two wave functions are related by [latex]\psi(x, t) = 1/h^{1/2} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{2\pi ipx/h} \phi (p, t) dp[/latex] and [latex]\phi (p, t) = 1/h^{1/2} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-2\pi ipx/h} \psi (x, t) dx[/latex], where h is plank's constant. 2. We don't know

We don't need GMO's to feed the world. Even though 1 billion people are starving, farmers produce enough food to feed over 12 billion people. This is do to a range of factors, such as waste, distribution, and how animals eat more food then they produce. If the population of earth gets big enough (over 12 billion), we might have to use GMOs in order to have enough food.

The electrons transfer some of their energy by colliding with the atoms in the lattice, thus transferring energy to the atoms to make them move. This causes heat. The equation for the increase in heat energy is Q = I2Rt Where Q is the heat energy from the electricity, I Is the current, t is time, and R is the resistance of the wire.

I'll play anyone who's interested. PM me if you are.

Yes, but why would they be the shape as shown in discovery channel?

Why are raindrops shaped the way they are?

In special relativity, what is the equation for force?

By angular motion, I mean motion moving about an axis or point, such as a spinning object.

If someone's theory about something in physics has no math, it is certainly pseudoscience.

An infinitesimal differs from 0 because if you have an infinite sum of an infinitesimal (an integral), you don't get 0. Infinitesimals have a value. I think I might have been wrong on how 0.999... does not equal 1, since 9 * 0.111... = 9 * 1/9 = 1 = 0.999...

We could fix the integral by doing [latex]\int[/latex]dpx/dx dx + [latex]\int[/latex]dpy/dy dy + [latex]\int[/latex]dpz/dz dz. This would fix the problem. In the above case, this would mean that [latex]p = \int (1 + yz/3) dx + \int (2y + xz/3) dy + \int (\exp(z) + xy/3) dz [/latex] giving you the original function.

I don't think 0.999... = 1. If 0.999... = 1, then 1 - 0.999... = 0. But, it does not turn out to be 0. Instead, it turns out to be infinitesimal. If 0.999... = 1, it would be 0. What do you think? Does 0.999 recurring equal one?

I think the series is a scam. History channel has presented no scientific evidence that aliens exist.

Your right. I would have to rethink that. But, if p is a function of x, y, and z, shouldn't there be components in the x, y, and z directions? For example, in the function , you can have px = x + xyz/3, py = x2 + xyz/3, and pz= ez + xyz/3. The sum of this would give you p.

It actually would be correct. The pressure p has components, and p is the sum of those components. This gives you p = px + py + pz. If you work out each integral, you get the components of p for the terms. This is because you are taking the integral of dp/dx dx. This is the same as the integral of dpx.We can now write the term as px. This is the same with y and z.

What do you mean by the universe dying?

I am checking myself. I just wanted to see if it was correct in order to proceed to the next step. I want to make sure I don't get any more errors in my calculations.

People are already starving. One billion, in fact. This is not because of a lack of food. It is estimated that farmers create enough food for 12 billion people. If we have a bigger population, we would be able to feed them up to 12 billion people. At that point, we would need more farmers. As for the reversible aging, this would greatly increase the population. Two thirds of deaths and nine tenths of deaths in the developed world are the cause of aging, so this could greatly increase the length of lives. This could lead to overpopulation.

Because [latex]\nabla[/latex]p = i dp/dx + j dp/dy + k dp/dz, would this mean that p = [latex]\int[/latex] (dp/dx) dx + [latex]\int[/latex](dp/dy) dy + [latex]\int[/latex] (dp/dz) dz, since you would need to integrate over each term to get p? I also didn't include i, j, and k since that would make p a vector when p is a scalar, so I left out i, j, and k.

Oh, then that would mean I am wrong on the gradient. But also, in a previous post in the beginning I wrote the integral as [latex]\int_A[/latex]np dA. When there was the normal vector, you said it was correct. I forgot the normal vector in my post. Would it be correct if I didn't leave out the normal vector? Would it be okay if I posted another equation about the gradient that is different then what I said before, while providing a mathematical argument?

Angular work would be W = τθ, where θ is the angle traveled and τ is torque. Because τ = Iω, we can also write angular work as W = Iωθ We could use vector calculus, since torque is also equal to mv x r, where x represents the cross product, making W = θ(mv x r)

Would this work? : Since [latex]\nabla[/latex]p=dp/dA and FL=[latex]\int_A[/latex] p dA (evidence), this means that FL=[latex]\int_A \int_A[/latex] [latex]\nabla[/latex]p d2A. Rearranging the Navier Stokes equations for [latex]\nabla[/latex]p (more evidence), we get (where * represents dot product): [latex]\nabla[/latex]p=ρ(du/dt + u * [latex]\nabla[/latex]u) - [latex]\nabla[/latex] * T - B Inserting this into the integral gives us FL= [latex]\int_A \int_A[/latex] (ρ(du/dt + u * [latex]\nabla[/latex]u) - [latex]\nabla[/latex] * T - B) d2A This means the force of lift is the double integral over the area of the pressure divergence with respect to the area. I would now have to work out this integral, then divide by qA to get the lift coefficient.

Something else that makes something likely to be pseudoscience is if it's in the field of physics and has no maths.