Jump to content

TransientResponse

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About TransientResponse

  • Rank
    Quark
  • Birthday September 2

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    Materials Science
  1. It is a metaphor to say that "they don't exist" I think some takes it too serious. The article claims some weak or responsive grounds in atheism. Every atheist should not take it as for theirselves, as if it is for their "atheistic case". Moreover, in the article, it is referred to "their less known motivations" and possibly "historcially-politically bacgrounds". Or something like that. You put in...
  2. Some passages: <<ROOTS OF ATHEISM ...Albert Einstein, who had a life-long fascination with metaphysics, believed atheism came from a mistaken belief that harmful superstition and a general belief in religious or mystical experience were the same thing...... Similarly, Charles Darwin, in a meeting with a campaigner for atheism in September 1881, distanced himself from the views of his guest, finding them too “aggressive”... >> Full Article
  3. Hello. I looked around, I have no idea and couldn't find any clear definition about it, at first google glance. However, I assume overlap may refer to "extra results in the presence of two deletion"? Whatever it means. Here something, maybe you genetics studiers understand: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1682730/?page=1 This question is too specific and too tough for me. Good luck..
  4. Let’s (also) bring up some definitions and refresh our clearance in topic, than just asking and answering questions. -Vibration: a mechanical phenomenon whereby oscillations occur about an equilibrium point. (Wikimedia) -Frequency: is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit time.(wikimedia) -Molecule: A group of elements (or compounds) that come together with stronger bounds than physical bounds, or weaker bounds than nucleic bounds. Two same element atoms might make a molecule as well as a compound with third... (Chemical/Ionic/Covalent bounds). A molecule might have two atoms or billionsxbillions atoms.. -Atom: Last and smallest form of the matter after breaking all physical and chemical bounds, till only nuclear bounds left. * * * The Temperature is a form of vibration and atoms vibrate too, because they do have temperature. Bulk space has no vibration. What sort of frequency can be obtianed from termperature-vibration? Is not themperature universal thing? Is a "vibration value" or "frequency" of an atom practically valuable, or measurable? Such a small thing's measurability possible? Probably not only because of the measuring disturbance but also the dynamic instantaneous micro changes in time, space, temperature, acceleration, etc... Around a very very very tiny thing, the atom? Even if two atoms are also molecules, Molecules usually repeat theirselves and not really "small". .A group of molecules can be microscopic to visible. Also an atom is not easily found itself alone, unless noble atom..... New Questions Might be related to this issue: How could frequencies be helpful? What frequency does a specific molecule have? And is it distinguishing from others? That might help identifying the molecule? Does it help to distinguish an unknown material's identity? How noble gases are distinguished, which has no molecular form? However, It does not exist singly; their repeatance lead to huge clouds of single atoms without creating a molecular form. This seem promising for measurability.
  5. I am fond of interpreting the situation like "distribution of the minus(literally -1)", rather than multiplying the nominator and denominator by -1. If you "move" the - to the denominator space, where (cp-a) becomes (a-cp) that do the trick. Note: You can multiply right side denominator by -1 which is the same. However, I suggest getting rid of minuses, than creating new minus signs on the leading left side numbers..
  6. distribute and multiply the -1 to every single term in the nominator. +a and -n are converted like this: -1*a= -a, and -1*-n=n. Hence the nominator is (-a+n). Note 1: -|number|*-|number|=+|number|. or shortly -*-=+ or, literally -1*-1=+1. Note 2: +*+=+ which you already know, possibly without being this closely aware of. If you assume or predict in math, geometry, you never be successful. Just learn the rules and applicate. Some details might be confusing but not. I would like to paraphrase this principle below, so it could be understood better: 1.You must first know priorities in operators/signs. Paranthesis is first>>Then power>>Then multiplying>>Then dividing>>Then Subtracting.. rely on the books, i might be forgetting something. just giving examples here. 2. "-" can be considered as subtraction operator or number sign, it won't be a problem. if you say -1*-n and (-1)*-(+n) wont matter because you know if you see * and -, you know * the operator and there cant be two operators at the same time. By the way "-(stuff)" means -1*(stuff). conclusion: if you see the sign/operator - alone, it is the short form of -1, it is not an operator. 3.Sometimes not easy to find out these even if they are written on the books. 4.So, patience, focusing, dividing the problems into small pieces if too complex are essential.. 5.Math is NOT about guessing or finding the answer.. "Rules, Analysis on(understanding) the data, How to" are essential.... 6.if you are not sure what you are doing, even if you hit the correct answer, you are doing it wrong. 7.Math, Geometriy are languages. If you see a word in math/geometry, you MUST know it has a clearer and borderly-DEFINITION. Should NOT merely rely on the meaning that the language whispers to your mind, because it often leads you to assume too much.
  7. I guess science or "literature wisdom" can come up with better suggestions (DEFINITIONS) for "God". Is not enough of using its "mean-value meaning" in the real time society? "God likes this, god hates that"... Is not that enough of speaking on behalf of god? Moreover, religious language has its own grounding problems In all religions. And a mess, that often clouds facts, truth, that might even exist beyond/behind a metaphor (that widely accepted as a nonsense). On the other hand, It has always been seemed to me that religion or god is always to do with "god is my side" "no hes in my side" sort of rivalry. In other words, a matter of claiming strength, claiming to have such strong alliances…Weren't Most atheists (not a coincidence) motivated by opposing religious establishments (people, not the buildings), instead of literally opposing the "ultimate being beyond beings"? Where the religious institutions had become a way of 'earning life' for a certain class; instead of (being able for) illuminating people. The truth, a right, a struggle made NOT in vain at all, by time, usually becomes a legend; then time passes, it becomes myth; (by a lot of reductions and automated extensions in every generation: looks like distasteful, 'untruthful motley collection') then what do you have as a last form of that message from history? If you call it teachings of a religion, or a way of understanding, good luck living a rational live-able life without focusing on todays alive world.! WE people come to life almost to witness it, explore it, rather than to vibrate the same vibration that we 'took' from past. It does not refer to or support the "truth changes", however. It’s healthier to explore real time life to retain the core, the soul, the meaning, if there was once, beyond the language... Maybe with the help of "correct actions' langauge along with correct language"... Words can’t protect meanings throughout history and generations. Written literature is not assuring that all the way. (Though, set of words, clear definitions might protect the useable-useful meaning to a point) Who could, should make those DEFINITIONS? As an occupational case? I think some 'illuminated' "religious" and "scientist" people already do it. However there is usually a promotional issue spreading and having acceptances in common sense... Maybe everybody knows but since the frequencies(way and attitude of expressing and acting) matter than the titles of right or wrong, it clouds judges and further "better results"
  8. THAT is awesome, especially for public security businesses. All agrees that this cant be considered a bad improvement or founding. However, we need **more** than that. This earth needs more "integrated" and "experimental" solutions than such singular "solutions". I could care more if the researchers, suporters, intelligence agencies were interested in seriously more of something that dramatically decreased violence, bad tendencies, and the need of guns. Somehow-Hence, it is needed to have better definitons for "good", "bad", "how, which behaviors lead them". We need to improve the teaching that a mean person take. We need to improve the mean langauge, comprehension, reasoning, tendencies, and "tame" per person. Maybe providing at least two languages for everybody? The question before this: is the language we speak reflects 'everything' satisfactorily, for that scope? How to improve the mean language? Or what could even this mean? Meanwhile, the origin of motivation might need to have a shift: from "the way of competition" to "the way of cooperation". Proviging a good course, while eliminating negative effects into cooperation. (Or define whatever they might be). * * * It is said that, once Confucius was asked: <<what would you do first, if you were a ruler of a country?>> He responded: <<I would look into their language>> Then explained: <<If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what must be done remains undone; if this remains undone, morals and art will deteriorate; if justice goes astray, the people will stand about in helpless confusion. Hence there must be no arbitrariness in what is said. This matters above everything.>> * * * WHY is the dynamic-spoken-language so important? Think of this: Math is a language, modelling/defining physical world events, structures, and correlations. The ultimate tool for bringing up theories/comprehensions, then mechanisms, then life easing goods, whatsoever.... MATH has always been improved, simplified without losing the levels of expression. So, why continue with the relatively same low-levels of the language we speak in our daily lives? Even if t is not as simple as before, the mean-spoken language is almost same. Even worse, lost perspective at some point, generally. It might be true that science or exploration hence information led to improvements in the "rated logic" and "common sense", but was it directly? No. Was it enough? I don't think so. Is this kind of a social engineering? Sort of, but should be distingished from similar ones. Accord to energy-conservation rules, after finding the energy-loss factors, if we canalize some of our attention, some of our energy; there will definitely be such changes for good.
  9. It could be useful if you knew "how do they response to temperature". Moreover, you could make interpolations yourself: by using at least one value of low temperature, and one value of high temperature, for each material property. However since phase changes are "singular" changes, if you want more correct values, you may need to make few interpolations for one property for different phase ranges. There should be few functions relating to different phases, for each property..
  10. High level familiarance, on not only basics, but also on theories based on basics. This comes by concentrated exercise of the knowledge. Useful sources, and the methods of using them. Experimenting/visualizing the theories. Moreover, It is essential to relate phenomenons, facts eachother. And distingusihing among similarities, when needed.
  11. Hello. My answer is: Ofc, no it is not late. Even if it is more difficult in some terms, "no" would be a 'more-wrong' and 'conditioning' answer. * * * I finished undergraduation on "mechanical engineering" 'postponely", after I was able to focus and give the continuous(which is essential for engineering, I guess) effort. I finished it at my 29, under some difficulties. (Undergraduation in 9 years, but studied truly only at 1st year and last 2 years). Nothing is late but your love and devotion might be judged (in some environments) time to time, which you sohuld not hear or care. Especially if your family not familiar with the field, as well. Sometimes thats not the only thing. You may have difficulty for earning life, too(Which might affect your motivation and course)... Most importantly beyond these, you should realize that you must not have a pride of a "weak-learner". Because learning requires humbleness, discipline,and respect, along with not comparing yourself to anybody. However it became easier for me, to study after 27, according some terms: My mind was more 'stable', and I had got what I needed from the other side of the life. Luckily my family support continued. Moreover, I found myself, myskills improved about research and studyng after 25. Maybe just being able to focus and having clearances in life made it easier altogether. If you seriously would like to go on, good luck and be aware of your situation. Never despise, Seek for truth, Always love to learn newer things wherever you are, whatever you do...Whatever happens, you will win...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.