Jump to content

ahmet

Senior Members
  • Posts

    387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by ahmet

  1. 55 minutes ago, Janus said:

    Washing your hands is more about physically removing the virus from their surface than it is about killing the virus.

    so, does this mean that in fact, we did not need to use soap? 

    interesting.

    if not; how do we remove viruses from the surface of our hands?

    addition: I was almost forgetting bacteria.sorry. but the question still stands.

    1 hour ago, studiot said:

    We are (all?) washing our hands etc more and doing so with chemicals we hope will degrade coronavirus.

    may I ask a question: I remember you had said that we would have a probability to face a new diseaase (i.e. pandemic) in a thread.

    now turkish media announces a mutated version of covid19?

    if this case satisfies your (or proves that you were right in your prediction), how did you reach that information?

  2. 1 hour ago, joigus said:

    I would have to be on top of the hill to look down on others here to evaluate them. I'm not in such position.

    How smug would I be if I did?

    I stand by my words: A superb explanation --especially considering the limited amount of time and manoeuvre we all have here-- by a person well versed in mathematics who has all my respect. MigL's explanation was also very helpful, although in a very different style and spirit.

    As to your kind offering of starting another thread, I'm not so interested in judging people as in examining ideas, and trying to understand some of the most difficult ones. But you're free to open that thread if you want.

    Here's smiling at you :)

    peheh , pahah :) :) :) 

    to me, this is just waffling ...

    :) :)

  3. 5 hours ago, joigus said:

    I was aware that @wtf was giving a superb mathematician's exposition of the topic,

    I think he is classsical mathematician. In fact, I can't see an extraordinary mathematician at anywehere (all around the world). (i.e. superb)

    but this will be another thread. 

    lets start a new thread for that if you are willing.

  4. On 11/2/2020 at 6:44 AM, KyleLeClair said:

    When I was doing my formal training in the military, I supplemented classwork that was very watered down with Practical Electronics for Inventors. It opened up my eyes to the amazing world of EE.

    it smells lovely to me, could you provide more infor about this book to us?

    which publication?

    author?

    publication year?

    thanks.

  5. 19 minutes ago, CuriosOne said:

    I work every day and am physically fit if that's what you mean, I'm also a former model and music producer, in fact I know many celebrities and have contributed over $500.000 in free work labor, I'm a very respected artist as well "despite" the bogus reputation I've gained here...😎

    honestly, your achievements are yours and no relevancy with me. 

    but...it seems even if you are not as knowledgeable as @swansont, to me you are more intelligent than him. sure. because in spite of the failures I had done, you have understood the message what intended. so , congratulations. (and to swansont, I predict, I will have published materials also in english, so don't bother yourself. you are wrong. 

    the only disadvantage ,I had wrote that text with my phone and I was on a urgent way,so I could not make any reform. sorry for that. 

    anyway, lets go on the topic 

    you claim or it is being understood that you mention that two points would be linear or not linear.

    this is wrong. 

    linear is a description not just for two points , but for functions. (to use just for two point is wrong)

    shortly, a linear function would be the  property of a function that satisfies

    [math]f(tx+my)=tf(x)+mf(y) [/math] where t and m are scalar and x and y are vectors. (f is a function/operator on a vector space)

     

  6. 4 hours ago, CuriosOne said:

    Whatever a tangent line is, that's what I mean..

    The points of (x + delta h)

    In regards of these 2 points are:

    "2 points" on the ""tangent line?"" 

    Linear

    Or 2 points on the curve itself

    Not linear 

    I'm not sure due to how calculus was created for something constantly changing at some point in time....

    I think you are confused even very basic instructions. Joigus tried to "politely" provide basic notations or kindly tried to ensure you understand that some keywords you used in your previous comment were incorrectly used or not understood by you. 

    But to better help you, i can suggest that you first know;

    _ mathematics is a discipline 

    _ first of firsts please ensure how maths could be better studied ( big clue: please study by writing, and feel yourself as you responsible for everything you express, in progress you should also accept that you must prove everything you say in every step of proofs. 

     

    _  you need to be patient, but hardworking or having regular work ( everyday please at least 1_2 hour per day in average with the exception of course you take (if any) 

     

    _ internalize first basic descriptions and thorems. 

     

    In progress you can either run or fly depending your dedication or work manner. 

     

    Good luck

    ahmet

  7. what you ask does not seem clear to me.

    but basically, the slope of tangent is the value of derivation function at the point where tangent is drawn. this is valid for functions with 1 variable.

    but for functions with  several variables, we prefer differentiation instead of derivation. 

    14 minutes ago, CuriosOne said:

    Are these Points Hyper Planes?? Light Cones?? Faster Than Light Speeds?? N Gons?? Oragami?? 

    this seems to me: meaningless and irrelevant..sorry.

  8. I I think no.(because in fact,it seems that there is no meaningful correlation between these two conditions)

    Also, CharonY 's reply is a bit supporting this , especially here in turkey if we were to comply the doctors ,I think,we would potentially die even earlier. 

    Almost All of my family got catched to covid19 and sadly, my mother returned at the side of death but why?

    I think because of the unqualified medical service. I do not mention the non existence of cure or vaccine for this new disease, but the doctors...

    the most common thing here we see turkish doctors write drugs, commonly even random.

    yes, without any examination it is really not an extraordinary to see turkish doctors write many drugs.

    as result: There was nothing to do with tension ilness (i.e. no problem with blood pressure and etc all other details(i.e. blood illness)) but after the 15 days cure in hospital (she had slept) according to the doctor who examined her, my mother's illness changed to blood pressure. (because they did something we do not know and also after going out from the hospital, one drug was given for blood pressure (I can also write the drug's name: seneloc) 

    anyway, I am sure that was nothing to do with my mother and blood pressure problem (i.e. disease). but the doctors thoght that she had had blood pressure problem.

    my mother did not continue that drug and still she has no blood pressure problem.

    but unfortunately I commonly observed this: whenever the doctor is not capable to give a response to the case, she/he writes / prescribes the drugs.

    result 2: I do not believe the quality of modern science.

    the case might be better at somewhere or in comparison to in the past (but not passing 1400 years before)

    however, in far past,I think the better system might have existed. 

     

     

     

    On 12/17/2020 at 8:32 PM, CharonY said:

    It depends a lot on lifestyle, though.

    do you agree that we would find us in a well ordered uncertainty if we were to do everything in compliance of existing doctors ' advices ?

    because it is almost impossible.

    in fact, I do not blame anyone , but the system is not good enough. 

    UPDATE: 

    sorry ,I missed some points. (I was also supposing we were in medical science forum)

    yes ,I agree that science could make us live longer. why not? 

    but the system is not sufficiently good really in the current status. Also one should take into account that science was not always being satisfied/obtained by education.

    some useful keywords: intelligence, knowledge, science, education.

     

  9. send your paper to journals. if the paper is suitable for publication they will accept it, if not they won't accept. 

    as I look for something about "real life applications",I only overviewed and ...consider the probability that it would not be a new thing you provide.

    because not only taylor series,we have complex series,too (Laurent series)

    ....

  10. 6 minutes ago, Sensei said:

    ..you cannot use your own HTML+CSS+JS+PHP on 3rd party website like this forum..

    You have to use what is built-in website.

    This part of the forum (The Sandbox) is for testing such built-in features.

    Permission to execute JS + PHP on a third party would allow deep surveillance of forum members, person identification, hacker attacks, money theft etc.

    this is correct ,I also sometimes add the mechanism of +TCP,UDP protocols and all the content relevant to this.

    but in spite of these details, I see many people using their own websites,though. Can we say that most of them were not sufficiently knowledgeable?

    About LaTeX:

    I have not used it so much and I was supposing that it would not contain good/shining colours. (i.e. not suitable for a good presentation)

    setting formulas, colours , borders , etc ...this is a part of programming that might require good work.

     

     

  11. to me in the current status the management is effective ,also more effective than working hard. but this presumably more valid in good countries regarding technological and scientific developments. of course this is my personal idea,I might be wrong.

     

     

    what about the future?(Your question)

    it is not so much clear. But all in all , rather than working hard , working  to what, will be effective. 

  12. 15 hours ago, studiot said:

    Gosh you have got a lot of geometry and topology into this question.

    :)

    I have not felt myself good in geometry (but not in basic topology) so I had not replied.

    but simply,this quotation is a good reply.

    and if I am not wrong, I think this user is confusing herself/himself.

    (Note: I know that hyperplane did not have to be 3 dimension. because I remember from somehwere when P is a plane,then P+t is hyperplane. 

    15 hours ago, studiot said:

    hyperplane  three dimensions, for more we do not distinguish further names just an n dimensional hyperplane.

     

  13. 3 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

    You cannot know if for example  a Blind person is incorporating Visual Experiences in with their Hearing experiences. If they were, then they probably could not possibly know that they are experiencing Conscious Light phenomena  with their Auditory Experience. Just a thought, because we cannot know what their Experience is and they cannot properly tell us.

    again crudely, , senses have modality and and the sensitivity is not same at ,all as you know or should know. defined by logarithm or via it. 

    but of course ...yes , there is probability for some types of senses (also there might be different sense systems which WERE NOT DEFINED YET)

    because for instance there might be intersense or different senses.

    ...

    but intersense is surely possible. (even though it is not cogent for all) as one can experience if you apply pressure through your eyes, you will perceive a light although that organ is not being transdyced normally via pressure.

     

    I know ear (auditory) system works differently. 

    but to me ,I consider the possibility for the case if any living thing can see, that would not be able to perceive. I think this is possible.

    17 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

    Conscious Experiences are not explainable in language. They must be Experienced.

    if you mean "experience" is totally apart from "descriptons" or 

    there exist some "experience" types that were not explainable, then

    I definitely disagree to this idea. We only do not know them,but that does not mean that they were not explainable.

  14. 23 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

    If I say Redness it makes them stop and think a little Deeper about the Perception of the Red or the Redness of the Red.

    this was good!

    but I am not sure on whether it would completely help, because there is also a good amount of difference between theory and applications in the current status.

    or there are many theorems that were not useful/applicable.

  15. 15 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

    We don't know what the Conscious experience is for Blind people. Blindness is a degenerate case of Vison or non Vision. All we can do for now is explore and figure out what Redness is for normally developed Sighted people that can see Redness

    so, you mean that any blind one cannot realize (i.e. perceive)  redness,right?

    I do not think that the description itself should be so much difficult, but I might miss some details ,too, not sure.

    3 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    So any living thing that can see has what you call a conscious experiences?

    really interesting question

×
×
  • 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.