HallsofIvy

What do you mean by "type of inheritance"?

Why Pythagoras almost destroyed the world! And think of the trouble learning to count has caused!

You were not "scolded or humiliated", you were told what the conditions of this forum are. You say "actually I have exactly 15 questions. I've done 10 of them". Excellent! Show us what you have done so we will know what you do understand and what you can do on them. Then we will know what help you need.

Since this was originally posted two months ago: We have aBaCl2(aq)+bK2SO4(aq)→nBaSO4↓+mKCl(aq) Looking at that I see that there are "a" Ba atoms on the left and "n" Ba atoms on the right so we must have a= n. I see that there are "2a" Cl atoms on the left and "m" Cl atoms on the right so we must have 2a= m. Is that there are "2b" K atoms on the left and "m" K atoms on the right so we must have 2b= m. Finally I see that there are "b" SO4 ions on the left and "n" SO4 ions on the right so we must have b= n. That is, we have the four equations a= n, 2a= m, 2b= m and b= n. That is four equations in the four unknowns, a, b, m, and n. One difficult is that when the number of equations is equal to the number of unknowns there is typically a unique solution. But it is obvious that a= b= m= n= 0 is solution while we want non-zero values! If there is not a unique solution we can try to solve for all but one unknown in terms of that one. Let's try to solve for b, m, and n in terms of a. We have immediately that n= a and m= 2a. 2b= m= 2a so b= a and n= b= a. So if we arbitrarily take a= 1, b= 1, m= 2, and n= 1. We have BaCl2(aq)+K2SO4(aq)→ BaSO4↓+2KCl(aq)

Archimedes is supposed to have said "Give me long enough lever and a place to stand and I can move the earth". The "place to stand" is crucial! When your strong man is pushing against the wagon what are his feet pushing against? When he is standing on the ground, outside the wagon, His arms are pushing the wagon one way while his feet are pushing the ground in the opposite direction. Of course the earth is so large it isn't going to move so it is just the wagon that moves. When he is standing in the wagon his arms are pushing the wagon one way and his feet are pushing the wagon the opposite way. it is a stalemate! Nothing moves.

"In the sea" or "over the sea". That is, do you mean the pressure in water or air? Assuming the latter, which is more common, warmer water warms the air above it so that the air expands and rises.

Many people, who have little or no experience in science, look at a book or paper on science and see what looks, to them, like gibberish. Unfortunately, a few people conclude from that, that if they write gibberish, they are writing science.

I'm wondering if "CuriouOne"s difficulty is with the English language. For example, in another thread (which was closed or I would responded there) "CuriosOne" repeatedly referred to "smaller pennies" where the correct phrase would be "fewer pennies". It is very strange that he posts questions about Calculus but makes0 basic algebra or even arithmetic mistakes.

What help do you need or want? In order to help you we need to know what you already understand about this problem, what you are able to do, and what you are not able to do. In order to know that, we need to see what you have tried yourself. Surely you did not just post this without trying at all yourself? Please show us what you have tried.

The first one is pretty close to being trivial! H2O is the only "acid" in the equation!

The "Multiverse" and "proto-universe" are hypotheses with very little experimental verification. Do you have more to say about them?

That's obviously Wile E. Coyote who ran into the "monolith" while chasing the road runner. It even has "ACME" at the bottom!

I have no idea what you mean by "traditional simplification rules". I said "And that reduces to x^4= 0. Can you solve THAT polynomial equation?" Your response was "That is exactly what I am saying: the traditional simplification rules do not solve the equations accurately." ?? That was a "traditional simplification rule" that did solve the equation. What I would mean by "traditional simplification rules" (again, I don't know what you mean by that) solve those equations that can be solved in terms of roots, such as this one, very nicely. Of course, it has been known for a long time that there were polynomial equations that cannot be solved in terms of roots. There are other methods that work, to get at least numerical approximations, to any accuracy, for those

First, as you have already been told this is NOT a "polynomial equation". It can be written x^3= (N^2xc{N^2/x+ x)$. Multiply both sides by that denominator, N^2/x+x. N^2x^2+ x^4= N^2x^2. And that reduces to x^4= 0. Can you solve THAT polynomial equation?

Let me add this: one of the things Sir Isaac Newton was concerned with was the force that kept the planets in motion about the sun. He knew "mass times accelertion equals force" from Gallileo and knew, from Copernicus' measurements, that planets closer to the sun move faster than when they were farther from the sun. From that he believed the force, and so the acceleration depended upon the distance from the sun. But "acceleration" is "change in speed divided by change in time" just as "speed" is "change in position divided by change in time" while "distance" is given at a specific time, not over a change in time! That was why Newton had to invent the Calculus- in order to be able to define "instantaneous speed", "instantaneous acceleration" or, generally, the rate of change at a specific time rather than over a span of time.

So how do I move there?

This isn't really relevant to the main point here, but most people don't die because of "events". They die because their body wears out. And that would happen in any universe.

If they had offered "Effing Science" when I was in school, I certainly would have taken it! That is, if "Effing" means what I think it does.