Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 18, 2014 Author Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) a is the length of the semi major axis (orbital radius). you need to calculate for "a" depending on the orbital period. (orbital period is the time it takes for an orbiting body to complete of full orbit. the error is the accuracy of the model method. this has no relation with the rest of your post. a better formula relating orbital period, (time) semi major axis and bodies gravity is covered here. (due to the extreme difference in the suns mass and the Earths mass the center of gravity is the Sun itself in Kepler's laws so the sun is stationary) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptical_orbit keep in mind orbiting bodies are elliptical which is where it vis-visa equation comes into play (also on that page). here is what the semi-major axis means http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-major_axis "In geometry, the major axis of an ellipse is the longest diameter: a line (line segment) that runs through the center and both foci, with ends at the widest points of the shape" for an ellipse you have two axis the semi-major axis and the semi minor axis. a is the semi major axis b is the semi minor axis your not ready for a technicolor article this will only confuse the bugger out of you or in this case M theory (ADS/CFT) correspondance= string theory models stick to the standard model until you understand it before trying to learn the alternatives ( trust me geometry is something you need stronger skills in before you tackle string theory geometry) "Technicolor theories are models of physics beyond the standard model that address electroweak gauge symmetry breaking, the mechanism through which W and Z bosons acquire masses" key note not standard model for that matter what little I know of it, it confuses the bugger out of me lol the link on the unit names is a good reference to use I 90% agree with you, thanks for that link by the way.. Hymm 'a' is solving for arc minutes right? 1/360 of a cycle...it looks like on orbital frequency..These are inversely proportional??? My assumptions still hold..I don't think this is complex at all, its right there...F= force, but then f = frequency??? really?????? Its these things in science that is the hurdle that blocks my intellect and communication skills But I will take your advice " for now." So far all the links you given me have been incredible.. Yes, I think I am moving too fast and need to slow down... When you say: the error is the accuracy of the model method It makes me think of " human error" surly there are better ways of calculations right?? Electroweak interaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction Hymm sounds interesting, and looks " like I would be good at it." Electro Static? Conservative Forces? Plasma Fields? Strong Nuclear Forces? Worm Holes? Time Travel<------------- I HOPE?? How deep is this?????? What does it do???? Edited July 18, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings -1
Strange Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 Um....Isn't 0.001 used as a frequency? 0.001 is a number. It is not frequency, length, time pr number of kittens until the units are supplied. 0.001 Hz is a frequency. 0.001 Kg is a mass. 0.001 mm is a length In this case it is 0.001% - this is the amount by which the calculation is incorrect (expressed as a fraction: the answer is 0.001/100th different from the correct answer). 10^3 = kilo = Distance and grams= milla = Time?? Yes, kilo means 1000. It is commonly applied to distance (kilometre) and weight (kilogram), etc. It could be applied to time (kiloseconds) but I don't think I have ever seen that. Milli means 1/1000 and can be applied to distance (millmetre) and weight (millgram), time (milliseconds), etc. So then, wouldn't the " kilogram" have two separate systems of measure that make them both inversely proportional not to the square of the distance but to time No. Kilogram measures mass, which is independent of distance or time.
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 18, 2014 Author Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) 0.001 is a number. It is not frequency, length, time pr number of kittens until the units are supplied. 0.001 Hz is a frequency. 0.001 Kg is a mass. 0.001 mm is a length In this case it is 0.001% - this is the amount by which the calculation is incorrect (expressed as a fraction: the answer is 0.001/100th different from the correct answer). Yes, kilo means 1000. It is commonly applied to distance (kilometre) and weight (kilogram), etc. It could be applied to time (kiloseconds) but I don't think I have ever seen that. Milli means 1/1000 and can be applied to distance (millmetre) and weight (millgram), time (milliseconds), etc. No. Kilogram measures mass, which is independent of distance or time. I see, but then Kilogram as mass still = 1 point? I read that mass basically means all the atoms in an object, so I assume in this case kilogram = 1 or 0 = "I don't know" , not sure.... Then 1 just means that 1 of " something." This is hard to grasp, its that 1 basically it seems unavoidable to define.... Edited July 18, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings
Strange Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 I read that mass basically means all the atoms in an object, so I assume in this case kilogram = 1 or 0 = "I don't know" Mass is a measure of the "amount" of stuff. It is hard to define, except as mass. It is not really a measure of the number of atoms. But if it were, it wouldn't be zero or 1 or unknown, it would a very, very large number. It is quite easy to calculate the number of atoms in a given mass of a substance. (Avogadro's number, if you are interested.)
Sensei Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) f.e.12 grams of pure Carbon is 6.022141*10^23 Carbon-12 isotope atoms.So if you have 1 kg of Carbon,you have 1000 / 12 = 83.333(3) molwhich is 5.018451*10^25 atoms of carbon.At websites of different isotopes, different elements, different chemical molecules,you can read about their mass in unit, f.e.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_berylliumSee column named "isotopic mass (u)"f.e.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_chlorideon the right you have table with row "Molar mass 58.44 g mol−1"g/mol is used by chemists, while is used by physicists.Mass of complex chemical molecule is pretty much sum of masses of atoms it's made of.H2O has 18 u = 18 g/mol = 1u + 1u + 16u (1u is approximately mass of one Hydrogen atom, and 16u is approximately mass of one Oxygen atom)if you have 1 kg of water it's approximately1000 / 18 = 55.555(5) mol = 3.3456*10^25 molecules of water.Elements have not fully integer masses in u unit like f.e.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorinebecause typical atom has different amount of isotopes, which vary masses.Chlorine-35 isotope has mass 34.96885268 u (approximatelly 35 u)Chlorine-37 isotope has mass 36.96590259 u (approximatelly 37 u)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_chlorineCl-35 has ~76% abundance,butCl-37 has ~24% abundance,34.96885268 * 0.7576 + 36.96590259 * 0.2424 = 35.4529375782on website you can read average mass of Chlorine 35.45 g/mol (pretty close to above, isn't?) Edited July 18, 2014 by Sensei
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 18, 2014 Author Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) Mass is a measure of the "amount" of stuff. It is hard to define, except as mass. It is not really a measure of the number of atoms. But if it were, it wouldn't be zero or 1 or unknown, it would a very, very large number. It is quite easy to calculate the number of atoms in a given mass of a substance. (Avogadro's number, if you are interested.) molar mass 6.02*10^34 G = 6.7*10^-11 h = 6.626 1 A = 1 C/s = ~ 6.24*10e18 = 62400000000000000000 electrons/second elementary charge of single electron -1.602*10e-19 C elementary charge of single proton +1.602*10e-19 C planck length 1.61619997*10e-35 m Observation " remember" I am the only one that notices this??? Why 6???? Whats so special about 6?????? You say, Mass is a measure of the "amount" of stuff. It is hard to define, except as mass. now you sound like me WHAT STUFF?????????????? Edited July 18, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings -1
Sensei Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) Why 6???? Whats so special about 6?????? Nothing. It's just a number. Planck const in electron volt units is 4.135667*10^-15 eV*s After normalization of some units to 1, you would get other answers.. You're writing wrong again. You can't write 6.24*10e18, it should be 6.24*10^18 or 6.24e18 or 6.24e+18 When there is 10 to power x, you don't use "e". f.e. 1e3 or 10^3 or 1000 Edited July 18, 2014 by Sensei
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 18, 2014 Author Posted July 18, 2014 f.e. 12 grams of pure Carbon is 6.022141*10^23 Carbon-12 isotope atoms. So if you have 1 kg of Carbon, you have 1000 / 12 = 83.333(3) mol which is 5.018451*10^25 atoms of carbon. At websites of different isotopes, different elements, different chemical molecules, you can read about their mass in unit, f.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_beryllium See column named "isotopic mass (u)" f.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_chloride on the right you have table with row "Molar mass 58.44 g mol−1" 1 g/mol is the same as 1 u. One is used by chemists, while is used by physicists. Mass of complex chemical molecule is pretty much sum of masses of atoms it's made of. H2O has 18 u = 18 g/mol = 1u + 1u + 16u (1u is approximately mass of one Hydrogen atom, and 16u is approximately mass of one Oxygen atom) if you have 1 kg of water it's approximately 1000 / 18 = 55.555(5) mol = 3.3456*10^25 molecules of water. Elements have not fully integer masses in u unit like f.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine because typical atom has different amount of isotopes, which vary masses. Chlorine-35 isotope has mass 34.96885268 u (approximatelly 35 u) Chlorine-37 isotope has mass 36.96590259 u (approximatelly 37 u) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_chlorine Cl-35 has ~76% abundance, but Cl-37 has ~24% abundance, 34.96885268 * 0.7576 + 36.96590259 * 0.2424 = 35.4529375782 on website you can read average mass of Chlorine 35.45 g/mol (pretty close to above, isn't?) To stay on topic I will ask..Pi squared = percent????????????? Like this: Cl-37 has ~24% abundance I copied this for later practice... In this here: if you have 1 kg of water it's approximately 1000 / 18 = 55.555(5) mol = 3.3456*10^25 molecules of water. 1000 = kg of water, where did 18 come from??? You see I have a hard time stopping the number theory I see, very sorry about this, it happens automatically... I see patterns, I cant control that.. In this: 34.96885268 * 0.7576 + 36.96590259 * 0.2424 = 35.4529375782 36-35 = 1?? This is how I see " numbers." Not sure why all this looks like " time" and nothing else.. percent? 10^2 Pi squared = percent????????????? I will practice on this... Nothing. It's just a number. Planck const in electron volt units is 4.135667*10^-15 eV*s After normalization of some units to 1, you would get other answers.. You're writing wrong again. You can't write 6.24*10e18, it should be 6.24*10^18 or 6.24e18 or 6.24e+18 When there is 10 to power x, you don't use "e". f.e. 1e3 or 10^3 or 1000 normalization of a surface normal? equilibrium? normalization has many meanings... These are fundamental constant right? or just numbers? They appear to follow an order of operations, due to their relationships to the number 6, what ever that at this point means.. There is a connection... Wave Function uses normalizing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalisable_wave_function To stay on topic I will ask..Pi squared = percent????????????? Like this: Cl-37 has ~24% abundance I copied this for later practice... In this here: if you have 1 kg of water it's approximately 1000 / 18 = 55.555(5) mol = 3.3456*10^25 molecules of water. 1000 = kg of water, where did 18 come from??? You see I have a hard time stopping the number theory I see, very sorry about this, it happens automatically... I see patterns, I cant control that.. In this: 34.96885268 * 0.7576 + 36.96590259 * 0.2424 = 35.4529375782 36-35 = 1?? This is how I see " numbers." Not sure why all this looks like " time" and nothing else.. percent? 10^2 Pi squared = percent????????????? I will practice on this... normalization of a surface normal? equilibrium? normalization has many meanings... These are fundamental constant right? or just numbers? They appear to follow an order of operations, due to their relationships to the number 6, what ever that at this point means.. There is a connection... Wave Function uses normalizing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalisable_wave_function are you sure when you say this: You can't write 6.24*10e18 =6.24e+19 it should be 6.24*10^18=6.24e+18 6.24e+19/6.24e+18=10 They seem to 'fit in quite well" with the base of ten number system. in fact this where I specialize... Maybe we are overlooking this letter------------>e What is its alpha numerical " meaning"?
Sensei Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) 1000 = kg of water, where did 18 come from??? ~18 u is mass of H2O ~16 u is mass of O ~1.0078 u is mass of H 1+1+16=18 This ratio is obtained from electrolysis experiment in early XIX century. During electrolysis water in liquid state is split to Hydrogen gas and Oxygen gas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water Edited July 18, 2014 by Sensei
Acme Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 To stay on topic I will ask..Pi squared = percent????????????? Meaningless drivel. ... 6.24e+19/6.24e+18=10 They seem to 'fit in quite well" with the base of ten number system. in fact this where I specialize... More meaningless drivel. The values are independent of the base chosen to represent them. There is no individual numeral six in any numeration base six or below. Maybe we are overlooking this letter------------>e What is its alpha numerical " meaning"? The e refers to 'exponent'. E notation A calculator display showing the Avogadro constant in E notation Most calculators and many computer programs present very large and very small results in scientific notation. Because superscripted exponents like 107 cannot always be conveniently displayed, the letter E or e is often used to represent times ten raised to the power of (which would be written as "× 10b") and is followed by the value of the exponent; in other words, for any two real numbers a and b, the usage of "aEb" would indicate a value of a × 10b. Note that in this usage the character e is not related to the mathematical constant e or the exponential function ex (a confusion that is less likely with capital E); and though it stands for exponent, the notation is usually referred to as (scientific) E notation or (scientific) e notation, rather than (scientific) exponential notation (though the latter also occurs). The use of this notation is not encouraged in publications.[2] ... Scientific notation
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 19, 2014 Author Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) Meaningless drivel. ... More meaningless drivel. The values are independent of the base chosen to represent them. There is no individual numeral six in any numeration base six or below. The e refers to 'exponent'. Scientific notation Sensei " has already" cleared that up for me, " with numerical examples" to back this up" Uhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, ANYTHING ABOUT PI RATIO THOUGH???????? That is the topic JUst SaYIng Anyway, ACME I asked for the "alpha numerical " meaning" of e I am well aware that e stands for exponent. Please don't insult my intelligence. You say The values are independent of the base chosen to represent them? I am , will and shall remain confused on this, until I understand the logic as to why>>>? For example, c = 299.792.458 m/s right?? why do calculators only accept the number as 299.792458 ??????????? Thats what I wanna know. This is what I am trying to understand about e, the alpha numeric meaning, I think you know what I am talking about. Alphanumeric (sometimes shortened to alphameric) is a combination of alphabetic and numeric characters, and is used to describe the collection of Latin letters and Arabic digits or a text constructed from this collection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphanumeric So then Your description on e appears to be a Meaningless drivel...How about that! Also are you aware that pi ratio can be used as percent? I think you also know that too. Are you reading this post correctly????? Pi and the Fibonacci Numbers http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibpi.html Edited July 19, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings
Ophiolite Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 ACME I asked for the "alpha numerical " meaning"? of e I am well aware that e stands for exponent. Please don't insult my intelligence. If you posted in a coherent, manner, avoided talking nonsense, stopped jumping all over the place, ceased using weird mixtures of font and wide open spaces, then we wouldn't have to guess what you mean. If anyone is insulting your intelligence it is yourself. Members are being outstandingly patient in trying to help you gain knowledge. I recommend you show appreciation of that, instead of attacking them. 1
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 19, 2014 Author Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) If you posted in a coherent, manner, avoided talking nonsense, stopped jumping all over the place, ceased using weird mixtures of font and wide open spaces, then we wouldn't have to guess what you mean. If anyone is insulting your intelligence it is yourself. Members are being outstandingly patient in trying to help you gain knowledge. I recommend you show appreciation of that, instead of attacking them. I beg your pardon?????????????????????????????????? I have already stated that I am retarded, I have already stated that I am a drop out from highschool " because they don't want Blacks nor Latinos there, I have already stated that I get my books out from the garbage or read from the internet.. If members don't wont to deal with me, then they do so on their own free will... ACME, the member did not answer my question nor did they have anything positive to say.... They are instigating on personal issues simply because I am asking questions about taboo topics in science, something I have known to be filled with conspiracy. I am not going to tolerate abuse here plus their is already a NOTE here, about this from a moderator..... Go against your own will and wishes while breaking your own forum rules, it only makes the forum look bad. Its plain and simple, if I am such a bother to members, simply don't deal with me.... Edited July 19, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings
Strange Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 ACME I asked for the "alpha numerical " meaning" of e I am well aware that e stands for exponent. The meaning of "e" is "exponent". I'm not sure what else you want to know.\ For example, c = 299.792.458 m/s right?? why do calculators only accept the number as 299.792458 ? The only difference I can see is that you have a spurious extra "." in the first version. That is not a valid format for a number. Also are you aware that pi ratio can be used as percent? Any number can be represented as a percentage, just by multiplying it by 100. 1
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 19, 2014 Author Posted July 19, 2014 The meaning of "e" is "exponent". I'm not sure what else you want to know.\ The only difference I can see is that you have a spurious extra "." in the first version. That is not a valid format for a number. Any number can be represented as a percentage, just by multiplying it by 100. Thanks Strange, I was trying to " make this point" So, this topic should be tossed out in the trash can. Taking a break from this forum, be back some time later. To all whom were patient with me, thanks you have no idea how much I have learned,,
Strange Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 I have already stated that I am retarded, I have already stated that I am a drop out from highschool " because they don't want Blacks nor Latinos there, I have already stated that I get my books out from the garbage or read from the internet.. I don't see how that is relevant. You can choose to start thinking linearly and rationally. It is up to you to learn (if you want to). You choose to make random incoherent posts full of numerology and basic mistakes. You can't blame anyone else for your current behaviour. You need to stop and learn basic arithmetic (how to write down numbers, what fractions and decimals are, etc) and algebra (what equations looks like and how to manipulate them) before you start making random sentences about science and maths that is beyond you. Your choice. 1
Acme Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 So, this topic should be tossed out in the trash can. ... Yes.
andrewcellini Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 Iwonderaboutthings, there is probably no pattern to the "6's" that you are highlighting, or at the very least not the pattern you are "observing."
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 19, 2014 Author Posted July 19, 2014 Yes. Hymmm, was that what you wanted Acme>>>??? Why did you not answer question??? I replied back to you....This is a simple case of "GANGING UP ON MEMBER'S! -1
Endy0816 Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 Numerology is false pattern recognition and is a plague on good logical reasoning. Many otherwise great minds have ended up wasted on it. The majority of others here are recognizing it as such and trying to show you the error in your thought process.
John Cuthber Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 Iwonderaboutthing Imagine that somewhere in the Universe is a planet very much like ours. There are just two notable differences. Firstly they happen to have 8 fingers on each hand, so they calculate in base 16 and secondly, some time in their equivalent of our 18th century they decided to use a seconds pendulum as the basis for their definition of the metre. Does the existence of these people make any difference to us at all? Clearly no. In the same way, that their decision to use a seconds pendulum doesn't affect our bit of the universe nor does our decision not to use that definition. The Universe doesn't care. Incidentally, in their measurement system, the coincidences about the digit 6 simply don't happen because they don't use base 10. So there can not be anything fundamentally important about those sixes. It's just a result of our arbitrary choice to count in base 10.
Acme Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 Given Mr. Wander's admissions of ignorance and his ongoing abuse of members giving thoughtful responses to remove that ignorance, isn't it about time to close this nonsense?
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 20, 2014 Author Posted July 20, 2014 (edited) Given Mr. Wander's admissions of ignorance and his ongoing abuse of members giving thoughtful responses to remove that ignorance, isn't it about time to close this nonsense? Given Mr. Wander's I am assuming you mean Iwonderaboutthings. There is a note here by a moderator it states " no more comments about the person" and to please remain in the scope of the topic... I have stated this several times already and sent a message about this... You are 100% breaking forum rules, you do not have respect for other members kindness on my post here, and you " truly seem" to have a position of authority of which you are abusing...But not with me " baby" My forefathers have already done this for me as Slaves for 500 years.... So if this thread gets blocked and I get banned, It is because of politics and control.. IT MAKES THE FORUM LOOK BAD... Edited July 20, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings
Endy0816 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Don't over dramatize the situation. Many have made similar statements over the years. They are gone and the forum keeps going. Work on your behavior(which relative to many others is not even particularly bad). You are always free to leave, that is the very definition of freedom. If you choose not to then you willingly agreeing to accept community standards(codified by the rules). Now the thread probably should be closed as your original question has been answered. As the answer was one of the more interesting results of a speculation thread I'd even consider it a reasonably accurate speculation(a rarity here).
Iwonderaboutthings Posted July 20, 2014 Author Posted July 20, 2014 ! Moderator Note Everyone, No more comments directed towards the person please - either talk about the argument or don't comment. I have been complaining about a member here ACME is till using insulting and very very rude comments on my behalf, while telling others to stop interacting with me, I am not sure you have received my messages about this.... I am very confused as to what is going on here, and I am even a bit concerned as to why he is doing this, the remark are on the last page... I have told ACME about this note, but they refuse to stop...
Recommended Posts