ahmet

5 hours ago, MSC said:

For example; Causation.

How can causation be non-linear?

 

mathematically; (as I remember)

[math] \alpha [/math] and [math] \beta[/math] are constants and x and y are vectors/variables.

if ;

[math] f(\alpha. x + \beta .y) = \alpha . f(x) + \beta.f(y)  [/math] then f is linear. (if not,normally f is non-linear)

even though anything requires to be stressed (i.e. difficult) it does not mean that it won't be achieved.

and defining it as "stressful" is relative. to whom is it stressful?

....

in turkish there is one word ,that might succintly express a solution for the case.

"(there is no problem about how the mountain is high),  even if it is too much high, the way passes over it/mountain.

mm one another sentence  is (being said that the owner of this sentence was originally Albert Einstein is) that : "Difficult does not exist ,(but), to be unready does exist".

31 minutes ago, joigus said:

Sorry, I don't understand. Interferrable?

some physicists state or divide the time roughly to three parts.

its surface...past and future (or I understood so). some other physicists describe more complex things on the issue.

but nothing happens as all I can see.

I am almost sure about these: 

1) travelling past times (leaving the existing time) is not possible. 

2) mentioning "time travel machine" is not only far away,but is also impossible. it is utopic.

3) all in all some sources that we could have consist of only belief about thats and state that travelling future was not as same as travelling to past times and was possible.

but if you ask my own idea: I don't believe the possibility of such things.

.........

(i.e. there are many void or valueless papers!)

17 minutes ago, joigus said:

It started with "the universe is a C-infinity differentiable manifold, dense, simply connected and boundary-less" --something like that.

yes this expression contains mathematcal keywords.

but to me, very mixed. What do you mean by "universe" ?

I could not understood well C-infinity?

dense set is any set when that set's closure is equal to itself as I remember.

I think I have not currently improved my geometry skills yet,so not commenting on manifolds.

but differantiability is simply multidimensional derivation (has its fromula and criteria) (e.g. all of partial derivations should exist and should be continuous)

mmm,I am not sure on wheher the rest of forums will reflect to my post negatively about an idea,thus I prefer to be silent. (It is not about you, a general manner across science and almost huge amount of scientists)

but I shall try to create good projects.

anyway,I have not read the paper but...I have a question: as a phsicist or phsicists "do you believe that time was really interferrable?" 

I ask this because  I know and saw in the past and still there have been many debates, unfortunately (to me) big amount of those debates have been  void. (>95% roughly)

I always used to suppose myself like mammorou chiba when I was a little child.

hahahaha I am really handsome. (mmm , more than mammorou) hahaha

23 hours ago, joigus said:

The paper is highly mathematical

maybe it would be good to wait @HallsofIvy 's assessment, but to me ; hearing "highly" word only reminiscents my romantism or colors rather than mathematics.

surely,it is not a mathematical expression  I am highly romantic hahah ha  

20 hours ago, MSC said:

Sounds like your Hodja has read MR Cohens Preface to logic. I like that! Either that or he's quite intelligent and is inferring the same thing as Cohen. 

 

 

 

no. but not sure.

again as far as I know this is being taught or known so in a brench of science named "cybernetic"

18 minutes ago, MSC said:

This needs to start since I keep getting corrected by others, as if each word has a mono-meaning and I'm using them incorrectly, instead of their being nuance between meanings and their contextual use. If you believe each word only has one meaning and you think being pedantic makes you correct, then A) You're wrong and B) You completely miss the point of what language and communication is all about. 

 

as far as one of my old (now retired) hodja says "in fact,words can both mean or not mean anything. Becase that type of communication is caused by cryptic transmission"

I also add: " this cryptic transmission is commonly based on local paradigms"

ok , if you mean I would be free to select any unit depending to the type of problem,then I think..my question has been definitely resolved.

yes, if so,I would just say: MANY MANY THANKS  

density of emotion 

mm ,if I understand  correctly you express this one: "the function itself does not come with any unit or not being calculated with any unit, but you also express that anyone can give any unit to it."

if you would like,I can upload the picture,but now I think it does not seem like a requirement,it seems the question is being resolved.

I mean something like these: after drawing the graph of function of sine. (for instance with R) this will bring you a classic graph of sine function.

but for instance you probably said that I could mark π/2 cm , πcm , 3π/2cm, 2πcm, etc..at each points. (But R does not write so,I mean if I would,I can add cm or mm or any else unit) Right?

for instance with what type of unit the π length should/will be defined?

(if I understood correctly,you say that I was free..to select any unit (?))

π is only a quantity ,we normally need something to define (for instance here) the length

but with which unit?

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

 

So I ask again: to what object do you refer?

The object I refer is that any object created by any function (by turning it around another function that offset of that function. (but here that function is :sine function))

(to better understand,I recommend this : first turn that function around the offset function and fill the inside of tunnel with glass.object is clear??

wait please ,I shall draw something by my hand..

consider these: how were we calculating these object's volume?

--->> an abject has vivianni window at its one side and other sides are regular.

--->> an object that created by turning [math]y=x^{3}[/math] function arpound x=y function (360 degree)

I underline the obtained object's lengths. these objects have to have length.

2 hours ago, swansont said:

The sine function doesn’t give you that, so that’s not the way to calculate it

 

I think I do not mention about that.

and

What object? You asked about the trig function.

you seem like you are not aware from calculating integrals (e.g.:  calculation of volumes, and mmm specific integrals (e.g. surface integrals and or green ,stokes , diverjans theorems)

sorry,I do not allege anything ,but your comment cause me to suppose something in this way. 

54 minutes ago, swansont said:

No. It must be unitless as mathematic told you. If x is in cm, a must have units of 1/cm

A sets the amplitude and also the units of the result, since sine returns a unitless value

 

Thus...this means that,we cannot calculate x axis' length that sine function passes over it (at 0,π , 2π , 3π..etc)

in that, could you assume please we turn sin(x) 360 degree around sin(x) + t (t here is any natural number)

how will/must the length of the object be measured?

13 hours ago, swansont said:

So the equation has to be Asin(ax) where a has units of 1/cm and A has units of cm

Hi,

I might have misunderstood somewehere.not sure.

This function Asin(ax) is periodical function and the period here is [math]  \frac {2\pi}{|a|} [/math] the values of peak can be set by A. 

Exactly the thing I am asking is that whether ax could be defined with centimeter units.

12 hours ago, joigus said:

A 1-cm-radius circle is a French thing. Why should a circle be French?

(There is a 1-m bar in Paris keeping this standard of length.)

 

pahah   why not: not for french but I am sure that the circle on Gold Lira (Turkish Republic Gold ) is turkish.   

Just now, mathematic said:

The x in sin(x) has no physical units.  It is usually in terms of radians or degrees.  sin(x) also has no physical dimension - usual definition is the ratio of two lengths.

and, so...?

I had previously thought that this topic would suit in physics but decided in maths, however if not, I apologise in advance.

Question:

can we describe the unit of x in sine function in centimeter?

for instance sin(x) is equal to 1 cm, where x is equal to π/2 centimeter.

Some external comments:

This question was a part of one of projects. 

Unfortunately I am not good in physics  in the current position although I am willing to learn it but I saw (almost) no problem regarding its mathematical side.

(because in fact as we know that sine function's domain set was R and value set was [-1,1] Maybe I am again failing because here the values in domain sets are angles)

Thanks in advance.

an interesting musics type from old culture coming from mesopotamia region

going on POPular style...

a bad musics but good ratio of listening in comparison to european style

你 好！

a good musics but low listening ratio.

mid/high quality!

.....:::alejandro:::....

an old and ...very bad video but a good musics 

32 minutes ago, CharonY said:

It is also a matter of context. E.g. saying that one should listen to scientists when it comes to pandemic responses of course means that one should listen to folks with actual expertise in those areas. Not scientists with expertise in other areas or hobbyists.

ya yes. but sometimes people or more correctly folks may be bigoted (i.e. incorrect). this presumably in somewhere may be extended to wide range of people,which is really significant count of people. For instance, here in turkey,I am sure that many people believe or act as you have to have a relevant and expected title (e.g. associate professor ), education and most seriously and very interestingly : regular salary and work. (in other words "an approved academic job at any university"

the last one to me is very interesting and I think that this can be accepted as a type of bigotion. 

because that is incorrect. First, under that that one complies the official rules (i.e. regulations), and deals with any contexts and spends sufficient effort and has expected knowledge,then this should be enough. But in many times this does not happen.

I agree to charonY if she/he implies/shows the regulations, but surely, pofession is a bit different.

I know several languages, but , there are many professors who do not know even one foreign language or who are not qualified on this issue, which is directly affecting the quality of any academic research.

I have not wanted to enroll any master or/doctorate program but I deal with and would continue dealing with scientific contexts and research. 

simply,I would like to do the research on  whatever I want and it seems I am a bit pragmatist (because I do not want to deal with anything that would not provide any efficacy anymore).

Thus can we accept me as a scientist?

hi,

although my question is way clear,I could not find a proper written (academic) material to prove it.

Question/Query: " I (state/claim) that in order to obtain consciousness we would  definitely need an action potential,  but not a graded potential because ...

a graded potential is just along with a neuron rather than jumping over neurons one by one. because its name is graded potential. 

....."

I need a published material (academic please). Almost all of texts (articles , book chapters) I read mentioning with both descriptions but do not clearly use the sentence I would see ,like above.

I fear ,I am lacking..

but any help will be appreciated.

( similar meanings : 

1) graded potentials cannot cause perception. 

2) Action potential is mandatory in order to say "perception exists"

3) when a graded potential jumps over one neuron to another ,its name is not a graded potential anymore, its name an action potential )