Leaderboard

"creation" and "destruction" are man-made humanistic words to describe process in which they gain or lose something. i.e. somebody has wood, and burns it on fire. Destruction for humanist! But from point of view of scientist, it's just reaction between organic matter with Oxygen from air i.e. transformation. In mathematics, "creation" and "destruction", senseless statements. In physics, we have pair-production, photo-disintegration, and similar effects which are examples of transformations from one particle to other particle(s), from one molecule to other molecule(s). Conservation of physical constants prior and after reaction between molecules, atoms, or particles. i.e. charge must be conserved, energy must be conserved, baryon number must be conserved, lepton number must be conserved etc. etc. Major part of quantum physicist's work is attempt of discovery of violation of some conservation rule, which was established in the past, which would give them fame and Nobel prize... Was the Earth created? Or it's made of matter which used to exist in the past prior 4.5 billion of years.. ? Was the Sun created? Or it's made of matter which used to exist in the past.. ? Gas cloud of Hydrogen and Helium collapsed in the center of accretion disk, and made the Sun. No human can go back in time, check it, and return here, and confirm that it's true. For humanist it's "the Sun has been created". For scientist it's "the Sun has been made of the matter that existed and collapsed due to gravity".. See the difference? The first statement is making something from nothing. In the second, it's just transformation from one existing thing to other existing thing, during millions or billions of years of cosmic evolution.

A theoretical treatise in modern physics would be mathematical. What this reads as; "I've made some stuff up and want someone to do all the hard work".

I think it is not a fair characterization of the state of affairs. Especially in the area of anxiety there are quite a few advances, but they are less chemical in nature. Molecular sciences especially have helped to unravel the pathways involved in certain forms of anxiety and PTSD which have shown that there is a complex interaction between stress and immune pathways. That has a number ramifications. One is that chemical treatments of whatever sort are likely only be effective in certain subgroups of patients. This can be addressed by our improved knowledge of potential biomarkers that help us to distinguish patients with similar symptoms, but with different molecular pathologies. Second, monitoring of these pathways are a way forward to improve cognitive behavioural therapies, which have shown to be effective in many cases. Third, this knowledge has assisted in the development of chemical therapies targeting these pathways. For example it was found that similar pathways are involved in both, post partum depression and PTSD. which suggest that medication in trial for the former, could be adapted to the later. As specifically for the question, a big challenge is of course understanding the mechanisms of disease and not rely entirely on phenotypic diagnostics to categorize them. Psychiatry has for a while now getting input from other research areas, often driven by new technological advances. The areas of neuropsychology and molecular psychology (at least from my experience) have seen massive growth. However, it will take time for these findings and research directions to make an impact.

Oh I got it now. I have to replace the e^x with variable for example a, in order solve it with quadratic formula. Then I simply set that e^x=a (whatever a will be) Thanks

Again: You have changed from |p| to p. Why? Is it relevant? And isn't the equation above based on the derivation @swansont already found an error in? Today we have already lost momentum. Because no definitions are provided this discussion seems to be going nowhere.

t is improper in this derivation. v = dx/dt, not dx/t

I’m sory you didn’t like my appology and feel offended, I will make sure you feel more cozy and warm next time. So let me understand your line of thinking better as to what justice is or should be; What you seem to be saying is that people who are less fortunate in life and are pushed into crime by circumstances should be treated differently than upper middle class felons? And btw revenge is not the right word here - responsibility for own actions and consequences seem a lot more fit.

Okay, I apologize for my snip, could you explain to me what you mean by the below? Because it sounds to me completely detached from any coherence.

indeed, if we assume that time can be surpassed as a finite value ( of not a dimensional essence, or without any restricting boundary as the speed of light is) or it can be reversed in direction of manifestation in nature, or reversed in memory storage or retrieval by human beings, i.e. the way we remember and retrieve our memories, or man-made machines, eg. video reverse play, then it can be quantified and be depended on motion if you use the newtonian motion laws. these may sound physics of insanity but when we will be merging Virtual reality with Natural reality we will have to deal with such issues in medicine, in technology and eventually in everyday life...

Well now that's a rather backhanded apology, if you actually want me to clarify, then why the adition this rather unneeded jibe (not the first time, there are some rules about civility here). swansont managed to question my use of "previously punished" (without resorting to this tactic) and perhaps he was right, but essentially my meaning is that some people are, almost, forced into a life of crime by the circumstances of their life, which can be pretty brutal/punishing.

How? I just asked questions, it's you that has made contradictory statements. Like I said initially, you're more than welcome to not post; but I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings. While I'm happy to answer your questions, can you please stop loading them with innuendo, so we can get back on topic, FFS.

Ive always been discussing magnetic field after the current is started as there isn’t one before the current is started.

Then how does the unmoving magnetic field populate the space around the wire if it’s an unmoving magnetic field?

FFS justice should be clarification on it's own, but to be clear the reason for an action should be judged as of equal importance to the consequense.