Mordred

Unfortunately spectrum analyzers are not cheap. Good ones are roughly 15,000 to 25,000 dollars. However one can compare a color to a frequency by doing research on the internet. Sites that show color to frequency relations are numerous. Here is one such chart. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color The complexity with this comes in the mixtures. Computers have a color range but this is merely digital assignment. The number of possible hues can easily exceed what a computer is designed to generate. However human perception can rarely pick out the differences. As far as UV bulbs, well this is readily available. Rock hounds use this tool all the time to help identify minerals. http://www.rockhounds.com/rockshop/reviews/uvtools_m100_lamp/ When I was a teenager I used to collect rocks. I had a pretty impressive collection. Though when I got older I gave that collection to another kid who was fascinated. The reason I mentioned the UV light is pigments can contain some of the same minerals. So it's helpful to test this in your classifications. Now as your tool of choice/availability is a digital camera. I would look at understanding how the camera digitizes a color. Here is one site to give you the general idea. http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/specrend/ One can dig for other literature on digital color frequency programming. Side note not all cameras, monitors etc use the same algorithms. The study of color can be a lengthy one. It's a good idea to study and consider the above aspects in your experiments. At the moment I'm merely providing what's on the surface. As opposed to detailed information. Such is the joy of research, a key skill to master is how to use the internet to dig out reliable literature and data. The other key ingredient is finding consistent test conditions. An enclosed room with a single light is helpful. Always use a baseline bulb. Varying bulbs can alter the results, some bulbs produce more yellow, others more blue light. Here is another recommended test. Take the same object under the same lighting. Use the same location for the camera. Then take the same picture using different cameras. You should see the difference.

Why would you think any line of research and data collection isn't science? The problem with global warming is limitted datasets. Is it man made caused? Or a natural cycle? I've studied global warming. Honestly there are strong arguments in either case. Take heart. I posted in one of your other locked threads a viable and inexpensive solution to CO2 levels. The problem with that solution is lack of side effect research. Not the methodology. Using oceanic bottom floor nutrients to encourage algea growth can work. It's been tested on a small scale. The problem is the potential side effects. ( imbalance of ecosystems) Seems to me your falling into science media traps. Trust me they are more common than you realize. In this thread you are proposing manmade interference on our atmosphere. What are the repercussions? Our atmosphere dictates our weather... Should we interfere or should we merely adapt ? Change on a global scale requires the cooperation of every country. Change is never easy it takes years to decades. One cannot fully comprehend the amount of research into global warming that is being done via the internet. Every major country has its own studies, and conclusions. Change takes time.

jlindgaard. Swansort is a Ph.D you can fling as many insults as you want. This does not change the FACT, he has the ability to recognize BS. ( this I count as one of the most lame and infantile arguments. With 30 + years of forum physics discussions. Not all on this site) Insults will get you no where. I've read several of your posts. None and I mean zip zero show any true science. Try studying real science instead of insulting those that have done so. Do you honestly believe or are so foolish to believe your better that close to a million or so professional scientists, with funding and research support? Photosynthesis is a major arena of research. Give us a break and get off your high horse. Were not idiots to blindly follow someone that cannot properly and professionally support their ideas.

It's a good thing you recognized such a flawed idea. +1. The site linked above says enough

Ever look at objects under ultraviolet light such as copper? A major factor is the light source itself. What distinquishes ultraviolet light as opposed to light from a standard light bulb ? Are all light bulbs equal in light/color mixtures? Even with the exact same ratings some bulbs emit slightly different ratios of visible/color spectrum. Focus first on imaging different objects with the same bulb. Before changing bulbs to a different rating. Then switch it up to ultraviolet. May answer a few questions on perceived color. Will a cow see the same colors as a human? Does one human see the same color as another? Or is the color they described a trained response? I'll let you ponder those questions. Is color itself reliable or should we instead focus on the frequencies? Why does spectrum analysis able to identify individual elements? How does the last question relate ? ( consider the objects your photographing comprised different mixtures of elements) If you truly want to understand color study spectrum analysis techniques. For example hydrogen and the 21 cm line . ( by the way it's great your experimenting. I suggest you study how spectography can identify chemical and element compositions via a more reliable method of frequency) vs perceived color. http://geology.com/articles/fluorescent-minerals/

Perhaps you should take the above EFE and look at the principle of least action. Null geodesic is the shortest time like path. [latex]ds^2=0[/latex] http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~luke/research/masters-geodesics.pdf The above article has a decent coverage A true genius would post the mathematics. Of his theory, All I've read is that your not understanding what a null geodesic entails. For example a null geodesic has the following properties. Only particles travelling at c can follow a null geodesic. take the geodesic equation in 3+1 4 momentum form of particle P, [latex]p^\alpha[/latex] is the 4-momentum. [latex]p^\alpha=E(\eta^\alpha+V^\alpha)[/latex] with [latex]\eta^\mu V^\mu=0[/latex] For a massless P (photon) [latex]p_\mu p^\mu=0[/latex] [latex]\eta_\mu \eta^\mu=-1[/latex] [latex]V_\mu V^\mu=V_I V^I=1[/latex] the above meaning photons travel at c with respect to [latex]O_e[/latex](Eularian observer) the above is a 4 momentum on a null geodesic. Massive particles however has the following [latex]m=\sqrt{p_\mu p^\mu}[/latex] [latex]p_\mu p^\mu<0[/latex] [latex]V_i V^i<1[/latex] a massive particle can never reach c and follows a time like geodesic. So how does your idea mathematically describe the above?. How does it explain the invariance of c to all observer's? The other problem is your not understanding the stress energy tensor. See equations 1.1 of the article I posted.

They are essentially differential geometry dimensions of varyious interactions and the degrees of freedom of the four forces. Some dimensions are the standard spatial dimensions. Others are rotational interactions. Yet others are simply extremely small interaction ranges. Compactified spaces. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold

The problem is finding a correlation between color and entropy.... color vs frequency). How is this connected to thermodynamic entropy?

Why would any particle species matter in a GR problem set of mass/ volume differential problem- set matter? The problem covered by the OP and the formula provided by Janus is one of mass vs volume vs distance of travel/geometry. All the mathematics has involved strictly the above.... RIGHTLY SO Particle species outside don't matter except thermodynamic influences apply, (stress energy, pressure influence- via the Einstein field equations)

on Studiots question it will also help us knowing the specifications of your rural power. From a Google search your probably using 230 volt 50 hertz single phase correct? Does any of these 4 plugs match to one on the rectifier? If not can you post a picture of each plug and socket. (This will help identify your electrical supply). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europlug http://www.worldstandards.eu/electricity/plugs-and-sockets/d/ http://www.worldstandards.eu/electricity/plugs-and-sockets/g/ http://www.worldstandards.eu/electricity/plugs-and-sockets/h/ also I couldn't track down any technical manuals on your components. Somewhere on each device there should be a nameplate with details. Make and model number Wattage Input/ output power FLA (full load amps) Supply and output amps. The other question is "are these devices single or three phase?". At 230 watt it can be either. The trouble shooting and circuitry will vary on the last answer. Keep in mind neither Studiot nor myself are familiar with the electrical codes of your country. The above questions will greatly help us to help you. As far as changing the relays from 10 amps to 30 amps this won't deliver more power. The circuit supplying the relays are designed to deliver 10 amp max. All this will do is reduce the chance of relay damage from overcurrent. Replacing the relays though may be necessary just don't expect extra power. Ideally you should replace one component with an identical or compatible component. Not redesign the circuit at your level of skill. Do you have a digital multimeter? Do you know how to test for an open or short using resistance? If no say so and we can explain how. If yes then start at the output. Clip ground lead to your ground outlet. (Keep device un powered) trace the outlet back to the first circuit component. If you see infinite resistance on the hot, live ,positive power line with the negative lead on the ground socket this is good. However if your detecting a measurable resistance in this case then you may be seeing some ground shorting. Next test on resistors. Place negative lead on one side of a resistor the positive lead on opposite side. (You should have a measurable resistance). If you measure an infinite value the resistor is bad. Go through each resistor on the board supplying the output plug only. Test this circuit board only at this stage. (Assuming multiple circuit boards are in your device). When you get this test done and when you answer our questions We will move onto resistance checks on other components. Visual check tests. Equipment magnifying glass... 1) clean components of any dust with a toothbrush. Remove any corrosion with same tool. (Do not use chemicals) 2) use magnifying glass, look for any signs of burnt discoloration. Look for any signs of component deformity( bumps, boils, out of shape capacitors, etc. 3) look at the soldering connections at each pin, signs that the soldering isn't solid. Test 5. Output voltage check. Power up unit with all components connected and case on. Identify the neutral outlet pin, identify the load, or live pin. See if your measuring 220 volts. Test 5. Output amp test (requires a known load). Multimeter wired in series with the load. Recommend using a high amperage rated resistor (15 amp minimum). Of value 1 megohm. Wire meter in series with resistor and output of unit. What is the amperage reading. Another method is as per this link. http://m.wikihow.com/Measure-Amperage. first method is simply a higher load. If you keep increasing the resistance values in series we can test the load capabilities of the unit. http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circuits/Lesson-4/Two-Types-of-Connections Ideally a decade box is handy but you don't have one so we will just use high amp rated resistors. here is some guides to follow http://m.rs-online.com/h5/mobile/uk/catalog?url=%2Fweb%2Fc%2Ftest-measurement%2Felectronic-component-testing%2Fdecade-boxes%2F&state=uk http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/reference/chpt-8/specific-troubleshooting-techniques/ http://www.circuitrework.com/guides/guides.shtml http://www.ehow.com/how_6085622_fault-circuit-board.html Diode testing http://en-us.fluke.com/training/training-library/test-tools/digital-multimeters/how-to-test-diodes-using-a-digital-multimeter.html Transistor testing with multimeter http://m.instructables.com/id/HOW-TO-TEST-YOUR-TRANSISTORS-WITH-YOUR-MULTIMETERS/ Resistor troubleshooting with multimeter. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-to-use-a-multimeter-to-test-resistors/5034314/ outlet troubleshooting with multimeter.(basic) http://www.circuitspecialists.com/blog/testing-an-electrical-outlet-using-a-digital-multimeter These should get you started. Please supply us with results of the loaded (resistors and meter) in series amperage readings. Electrical safety tips. 1) buy a 1" thick rubber mat. Stand on Matt while testing. 2) get a wrist ground strap wear while working near ICs. 3) ideally use electrical safety gloves. 4) keep your body out of contact with ground and circuit at all times (the safety gloves and rubber Matt help provide electrical isolation) 5) stick to un powered tests as much as possible. Do not do powered tests on open case components unless you can guarantee electrical isolation between circuit and ground through your body. 6) ensure all capacitors and inductors (including transformers) are fully discharged before any open circuit tests. Do this by touching a 14 awg wire that is connected to ground to any and all pin mounts of said components. Do this on both sides of each of the above components. (Capacitors in particular can hold a charge for years unless discharged) http://en-us.fluke.com/training/training-library/test-tools/digital-multimeters/how-to-measure-capacitance-with-a-digital-multimeter.html http://www.electricaltechnology.org/2013/06/how-to-check-capacitor-with-digital.html Inductor troubleshoot. http://www.learningaboutelectronics.com/Articles/How-to-test-an-inductor To trouble shoot ICs however requires the datasheet for the specific IC. Also specialized equipment such as logic probes and signal generators. However if the IC gets excessively hot. It's a failed component. (I typically use a infrared temperature gun to check for overheating components. http://en-us.fluke.com/products/infrared-cameras/fluke-ti300-infrared-camera-60-hz.html However a cheaper option is http://www.myflukestore.ca/product/fluke_62_max_mini_infrared_thermometer?gclid=CjwKEAjw5J6sBRDp3ty_17KZyWsSJABgp-OahVTX79589wnPaEYXELqD3b9ZdCT578YeN-fFiThezhoCh_zw_wcB Touching overheating components can lead to burns. This is a safe and practical option. Edit forgot to mention when wiring to the outlet plug use minimum 14 awg wire due to the amperage rating.

No it's the blackbody temperature at the EH. Not the Temperature inside the EH. The blackbody temperature in this case is loosely defined as the ability of one particle of the particle/anti particle pair to escape. The pair forms just outside the EH. One of the pair falls into the EH. The other escapes. Inside the EH. We simply don't know but according to the ideal gas laws the temperature of the singularity should be in excess of several million degrees. Based upon Pv=nRT. Higher density equals higher temperatures.

Doh right lol good catch. Answered late at night lol

First off never change the fuse ratings. If they are 10 amp fuses then this inverter is only designed to deliver roughly 8 amps normal load. The extra amps being for nuisance tripping. PWM. Is pulse width modulation. It's a common type of circuit used in inverters. It takes a dc or ac voltage and converts it to digital sine waves. Which is not the same as AC sine wave. Not precisely though close enough for most equipment. This type of circuit is rather complex as it involves capacitors and resistance values in RC timing circuits in older methods. Newer methods use specific pulse generation chips. Though this amounts to transistor diode circuits built into the IC chips. To deliver a modulating (rate and amplitude square wave). The circuits also includes diodes. Ideally you want an oscilloscope to troubleshoot this circuit. Using a digital multimeter may not be enough. Here is a few circuits for PWM. This circuit can be inside a single IC with component control circuits feeding the IC chip itself. Such as those variable resistors your adjusting. Those variable resistors are probably adjusting the TIMING CIRCUITS of the PWM digital on off rates. http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/es/Nov1998/08/PWMINV.HTM now here is the concern. You had two occurances of sparking at a relay. If this is a solid state relay damage to the relay may have occurred. However if it is an electromechanical relay it may be fine. However other components on the same circuit as the relay may have been damaged. Ie an internal circuit of an IC or transistor. Troubleshooting these can give experienced and certified electronic techs with the right equipment nightmares. Instead of powering up another inverter hook the output from this Inverter to other 220 ac devices. Light etc. You may damage your imini inverter as it expects a certain type of incoming voltage. Can you provide what the voltage specifications are on the imini inverter? Does it expect incoming DC power? ( most likely) .... Think about that for a second. inverters convert DC to AC... your power regulator outputs rectified AC.... in other words its supplying the wrong type of voltage..... (Which will damage both components) (Inverters take power from battery power, DC direct current NOT AC, or rectified AC alternating current)

Your not providing any details where we can help. Look for a nameplate info sticker make and model number please

Not sure where your going with this. If your defining space as the universe. Then yes we are made up of matter from the universe. We are a part of the universe, not separate from it No science has ever stated otherwise. Sounds to me more of a philosophical argument than a scientific one

Man is a collection of billions of individual particles. I don't see how you can apply Schrodingers equations in this scenario. Marriage is a social and cultural choice.

I particularly enjoyed Mathews Vector calculus. It's well written.

Actually I'm trying to get the OP to post better and related examples of what he considers suppression as opposed to the scientific method. Somehow an argument based on racism didn't fit the criteria. I'm hoping that the OP can provide more relevant examples to enhance the discussion. Thus far he's named a couple of older examples one being alchemy, the other on meteorites prior to them being understand. I'm sure he can come up with some current examples. We all know they exist. However I would rather see the OP present them to clarify his position. I guess what I'm hoping for is a logical rationale argument as opposed to what I perceive as being primarily an emotional based rant.

Now what in the world does this have to do with Science????? Absolutely nothing. What you feel we are being racist? C'mon mate get your head together. I'm positive you can come up with a better argument than the above statement.

Has it not occurred to you that not a single other member on this forum expert. Moderator or member has agreed with you? You have received zero support from any member in agreement with your views on this thread. You might stop and think about that, this thread has been read by far more members than Has posted. Yet no one has come in your defense. I wonder why that is? Could it possibly be that they all feel your wrong?

What would be the point. To advertise an example of someone namely you that is too foolish and hidebound to recognize the opportunity to learn and develop your knowledge? Most posters come to physics forums to learn. They may go about it wrong at first. However when they receive sufficient materials showing their ideas and misconceptions are wrong. They learn through the experience. You however is the breed that believes that just because we don't agree with you. We're the fools. This is just plain stupid. The resident experts are selected for their knowledge, training and helpfulness. Every forum expert has spent years studying their fields of interest. The majority are accredited experts outside of this forum as well. Can you claim the same? I seriously doubt it. This forum has rules, those rules are their as any forum gets its share of cranks. As a member of numerous forums this site is far more relaxed and flexible than most. On several forums you would already be banned and your threads locked. They don't allow any form of non peer reviewed speculation. Only textbook answers. This site grants that flexibility at the cost of a few guidelines. You choose to ignore that flexibility at their good graces and insult them for it. You might stop and think about that before judging others who are here voluntarily. None of us get paid. We choose to help others less studied understand current science. We've taking the time and underwent the struggles to learn as best as possible the current models. You would be wise to take advantage of the freely offered shortcut instead of being insulting and sniveling because we refuse to accept new models or ideas with zero evidence

Still no evidence are you even reading the comments and requests for such?

Looks like Phi is a prophet after all lol. I didn't expect any evidence.

how each of the fundamental forces interact can get lengthy for one post. Here is a good series. One key note not all forces interact with all particles. For example the electromagnetic force doesn't interact with neutrinos. Secondly all force carrying bosons have integer spin 1,-1,0,-2,+2. Fermions are considered matter particles bosons are not. Fermions have fractional (non integer spin) Electrons are spin -1/2. Protons have spin +1/2. https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/25/the-four-horsemen/ https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/27/dance-of-the-hag/ https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/28/forge-of-heaven/ https://briankoberlein.com/2015/03/01/light-of-other-days/ https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/26/cradle-to-grave/ The Higgs boson is spin zero. It's only role is granting mass to certain Particles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

I'll stick to real science. I know it works you can study your fairy land science.