CuriosOne

Posts
268 
Joined

Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by CuriosOne


1 hour ago, MigL said:
Yes, you are !
Most accurate thing you've said, so far.Does the same apply for pennies as to atoms? Oh I forget its not atoms we measure but "matter material" thats "some how" is massless unless gravity effects it...😎 Thank god for Galileo..
0 
27 minutes ago, iNow said:
Since you’re using currency in specific denominations to post your question, then no. There’s no such thing as a “smaller penny.” You can’t cut a penny in half and hand it to,the clerk at the register when leaving the store, even though we can account for fractional pennies in spreadsheets
Agreed...
So if our 100 pennies = 1 dollar...
Does 6 *$1.00.00 "one dollar and zero cents" mean $6.00.00 ??
six dollars and zero cents?
"There is a very good reason i added the extra dot"
And I know Members Are Not Going To Like It.
17 minutes ago, Janus said:In this example "pennies" is a dimensional unit.
2 pennies + 6 pennies = 8 pennies keeps the unit consistent.
6 pennies /2 = 3 pennies is also unit consistent
1/2 * 6 pennies = 3 pennies
You can't have "smaller" pennies, because "penny" is a unit of a defined size, and it is the smallest unit of currency (in the US).
The currency is a chosen system, but numbers are numbers??
0 
Is this as 2 pennies plus 6 pennies is 8 pennies??
could we also say 6/2 = 3 pennies
Does this mean that all 3 pennies are1/2 * 6 pennies = smaller pennies?
Im totally confused..
0 
3 hours ago, John Cuthber said:
Science has always relied on cooperation.
And, as the areas of science that are open to small scale experiments are sorted out, we move towards a world where massive collaborations like CERN are the way forward.
If scientists don't cooperate with you, it can't be because scientists are uncooperative, can it?It's not a matter of "jumping"; you have made your lack of understanding really crystal clear.
A notable example is that you didn't spell "knowledge" correctly.
I see spelling errors all the time, as im sure do others...Why are you polluting my OP with this??
Please stop making it look as though "anyone" can join the goodole science team, it don't work like that.
Its more than "obvious" this science forum "LIES" and tries very hard to make "thinkers" feel stupid or try attacking the ego by noticing "spelling" errors or other "non important" points to diverge from truly saying..
Sorry we dont know the answer to your question...
I know other members read this and dont comment for fear of getting bad reputations...
6 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:Like so, to quote just one experiment amongst many, many that have been done to date:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s4156701906639
And they didn’t even do it with just one atom (which is nearly considered ‘easy’ these days), but with a few thousand of them simultaneously. Needless to say the superposition didn’t last for all too long (for reasons I pointed out in my post), but it does demonstrate the principle nicely.
Can you state the reasons again?? Why the super positions did not last for long?
4 
2 hours ago, studiot said:
In another thread you said $100s on book.s
I'm sorry to tell you that you wasted your money.
Which book did you read that in ?
34isaproperfraction
43isanimproperfractionThat can be reassembled using roots...1/2
3/12 = 0.25 is as easy as 4/16 =0.25
3/4*1/3=0.25
Notice how 3/4 controls 1/3 =0.333...> infinity..
"Through base 10 "obviously."
As 0.25*16=4*3 = 12+3 = 15 *(2x) =30*(2x)= 60
There is that minute you spoke of...lol
60/ [10* (3/12)^1/2] =12
123= 3^2+1 = """BASE 10""""
So a number between 0 and 1 "Uses Base 10"" "from what I see."
>>>Is there a better way???
0 
1 hour ago, joigus said:
Oh, you can't possibly be this stupid. I'm not going to answer the other deliberately idiotic response you gave me in the other thread either. Bye.
Because "you dont know."
1 hour ago, studiot said:Thanks, I really hope your got something out of this because
I didn't mention particles once.
Yes I did say effects.
I am using general English words for your benefit.
A quantum effect in a system occurs when some quantity (usually but not always some form of energy) can only occur in certain specific values and not in any other value, even nearby that are only say 0.001% different.
These values are called (energy) states.
This means that when the system changes energy it can only change by the differences between allowable energy states.
Such quantities are said to be quantised for the system.
Another quantised quantity is electric charge.
None of the rest of your musings have any relevence to anything I said.
Well, i was told angular momentum is quantized, so the system you speak of must be orbiting at some angle within some time frame..
I was also told that the energy of a photon is "quanta."
1 hour ago, studiot said:Thanks, I really hope your got something out of this because
I didn't mention particles once.
Yes I did say effects.
I am using general English words for your benefit.
A quantum effect in a system occurs when some quantity (usually but not always some form of energy) can only occur in certain specific values and not in any other value, even nearby that are only say 0.001% different.
These values are called (energy) states.
This means that when the system changes energy it can only change by the differences between allowable energy states.
Such quantities are said to be quantised for the system.
Another quantised quantity is electric charge.
None of the rest of your musings have any relevence to anything I said.
0.001% where did this come from???
How can you have more than 100% of anything???
I swear either the books i read are lieing are this science forum is lieing...
2 
8 minutes ago, joigus said:
They shouldn't, as they aren't.
And there you go again with base 10. Base 10 tells you nothing about a number. There's absolutely nothing "seven" in number "seventeen", for example. They are as much unrelated numbers as can be. Seems like you just don't want to know.
Not at all....You make it sound as though nature has no underlining order, im almost insulted by this..
3 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:Next time you are shopping and the cashier gives you change, you better make sure the change is in base 10. You don't want to get screwed!
I guess this explains random prices..
What a unique system of permutations we have..lol
2 
6 minutes ago, koti said:
Proper numbers (or Proper Fractions)
There as an infinite number of them."""A number between 0 and 1"""
I'm getting this right out of """text books""
This is why i dont like to Google information and may explain confusions..
Proper fraction larger number on top smaller number on bottom.
Improper fraction is this thing in reverse.
So then, a number between 0 and 1 must be "a base?"
5 minutes ago, mathematic said:Define numbers. As is the question doesn't make sense.
I dont need to define anything, you either know or you dont...
Do you know??
Yes or No??
12 minutes ago, joigus said:They are portions of one.
xposted with Koti.
Sounds like a product to me, not a number..
2 
12 minutes ago, MigL said:
I he didn't know, a 'reasonable' person would ask Studiot what he meant.
Studiot would be more than glad to help, and explain further.A 'not so reasonable' person might start immediately making assertions about limits, derivatives, circular actions, angular momentum, and 'superimposing'.
Which one are you ?
My assertions comes from limited information by scientist and their books on it, of which I've spent $100.00s on...
They should say y = x^2 is circular or "frequency based."
that y' = 2x is "distance based" or "intrigal based."
They should make note that our default base is 10..
They should say that calculus uses the "same rules" as geometry and not make it look vastly complex when in fact it's quite simpler than most imagine....
The issue im having is the "permiscuos" use to describe "the same thing."
12 minutes ago, MigL said:I he didn't know, a 'reasonable' person would ask Studiot what he meant.
Studiot would be more than glad to help, and explain further.A 'not so reasonable' person might start immediately making assertions about limits, derivatives, circular actions, angular momentum, and 'superimposing'.
Which one are you ?
I did ask studiot what they meant..
Did you read it??
0 
What are numbers between 0 and 1??
0 
1 hour ago, swansont said:
I’m too old to jock anymore
Well, then you are very confused. You neglected to mention relativity or gravity, and macro scale GR has nothing to do with QM. The inability to reconcile GR and QM manifests at small scales and strong gravity.
The topic here is QM effects that can be seen at the atomic level or larger, in order to refute the premise of your question.
I assumed at these levels we "all knew what you just mentioned "accept the strong gravity note" atleast for me."" Maybe I should be more specific..Thnx for letting me know..
34 minutes ago, MigL said:I guess you still need to do some work on your question posing.
And forget your assumptions, or insights, or whether it 'sounds like' limits and derivatives, or circular and angular momentum.
Also don't bother pointing anything out to people who understand this stuff much better than you can even imagine.studiot has already illuminated my question with some very good points about "coorporation" something the science community needs dire help on!
I however would not jump so fast to judge my level of knowlwedge...
It's just that when I read, tiny change in y over a tiny change in x, it makes me think "something in between" is shared and maybe that was what studiot "hinted" whom knows...
""I like the more simple approach I guess..""
If science did not have BIG GAPS, I would not be so confused on my so called "unrelated facts" because they work just as good at marginal levels outside of the more theoretical guidance of "ideas."
"But I do get what your saying."
0 
Do Vertual Particles "Only" Superimpose?
And how likely could this idea be modeled in a "Macro" Phiscal Reality "General Relativity" example, and serve as some use in our modern understanding of nature's realms?
0 
On 12/25/2020 at 2:09 PM, swansont said:
They aren’t. The premise of your question is false.
""You Seriously Need To Be Jocking"""
The premise of my question deals on the "Reconciliation" of Gravity "Macro" and General Relativity "Macro."
On 12/25/2020 at 3:23 PM, joigus said:Ferromagnetism,* superconductivity, and superfluidity are among quantum effects that can be seen with your own eyes.
It is true that the context of QM par excellence is the very small, though. That's due to the smallness of the quantum of action when compared to ordinary experience.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferromagnetism#Explanation
Thanks for pointing this out, because I was under the assumption that this "could never" be visually scene...But for the most part it appears to be atomic based "unless there is more info in other discoveries."
On 12/27/2020 at 10:05 AM, John Cuthber said:Just another example but...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw's_theoremsays that you can't have something stable and levitated in space by a magnetic field.
And it should be correct.
But, QM gives you a way round it.So things like this are macroscopic quantum observations which you can set up for yourself.
I'm glad im actually getting "positive results" thnks so much for this link..
I've seen similar videos but get very uttered with the narration and connection to my OP..
On 12/27/2020 at 10:32 AM, studiot said:I will answer this for you as many others have this false impression that QM only applies to the very small.
This arises because the energy (transitions) involved are very small and therefore individually only affect very small particles.
So an individual quantum energy effect (transition) can only affect a minute part of a (large) macroscopic object.
However when lots of these small transitions all work together they can affect large objects.
The effects include our everyday Physics so this if I push a large block of metal, it is all the small quantum effects working together that hold the block together so that it can move as a solid body under Newton's Laws.
No esoteric Laws and effects are required.
The whole of our macroscopic world works as it does because QM is the way it is.
Hope this helps others as well.
Season's Greetings to all.
Very "Impressive Explanation!!!"
Best I've heard in all my studies!!!
My insight leads me thinking that...
Particles have a "choice" they can either work together or not, in effect of this "union" they effect the physical world??
Particle Wave, rings that bell..
Is this what you mean??
Also, you mention effects
"""restricted only""" on a "minute" part of large macroscopic objects due to transitions "quantum of energy."
"Sounds Like Limits dy/dx" to me
But is this minute 60*60 = 1 minute?
Sounds circular to me, ie angular momentum obviously..
This Minute...Earth time? Space Time?
On 12/28/2020 at 1:47 AM, Markus Hanke said:Just to add to what has already been said: there is, in principle, no law of nature that stops macroscopic systems from behaving quantummechanically. The problem is only that you need to prevent decoherence from occurring  meaning you need to prevent the system in question from interacting with its environment. This is relatively easy to do for very small systems, but becomes exponentially harder the larger the system in question becomes. Putting a single atom into a superposition of states isn't too difficult, given a suitable setup; doing the same with (e.g.) an elephant is  for all intents and purposes  a virtual impossibility.
How do you put an atom in a super position??
And to point it out, are the atoms "vertual copies" of itself?? As in the elephant scenario??
If this is the case, "I'm so surprised" the science community hasn't figured it out yet, or may have already!
Read exactually what you just said..🤣
3 
No math, no theories simple question..
0 
This reminds me of my original post..
What's the point of Calculus??
Maybe I should have asked this..
But anyway...
Is Math and Physics "Interchangeable?"
2 
5 hours ago, Ghideon said:
The equation x2=1 has two solutions, x=1 and x=−1 . Maybe that is what you mean by two input values, I do not know. Only one of 1 and 1 may be used at a time as already stated:
The above means that in x2=1 you may use one of 1 and 1 so that:
(−1)2=1
or
12=1 ."HOOOOLLLDD ON THERE ""PLEASE"""
1 Means 16 as in 1/1e4 = 1
Just like you said 1 and 1
Of 2 input values or opposites?
Distance and Time???
Can I see an example???
17 hours ago, uncool said:I don't see how "base 10" makes x^2 = x/x.
Neither do I, and that's what I'm asking...
Everything even in chemistry has a ,"base." A default a template...
8 hours ago, joigus said:Agreed. And it's the bizarre nature of your questions.
If you keep going on like this, you'll never get around to mathematics.
I cannot emphasize enough how much attention you must pay to these tips:
I could hardly agree more.
If you're trying to climb Mt. Everest, and you're looking at another summit in the distance, you're gonna fall through a crack. Does that make sense?
And for Pete's sake, solve a simple linear equation, get pleasure from it, and step on towards a more difficult problem. And keep going.
Get something under your belt, however modest, ASAP. No matter how simple.
Edit: Oh, and another thing. You're getting excellent advice here. Don't pay heed to "Daft Science" or "CrackpoGenius" or similars who might tell you how much more intelligent than others you are. They're distracting you and you've gone astray by their compliments before. I've seen it happen. That's another crack in Mt. Everest. Compliments are very distracting. Reliable information is gold.
Understood, I think I may need to invest more time in acoustic sound waves because your mount Everest Anology appears to be similar with numbers, I'm seeing this all over the place, no joke!
1 
Is asking basic questions about math really make others think a person is dumb??
I mean on science forums..??
Where did math come from?
What connects reality to math??
Why with so many numbers, a base is needed??
Might as well say (Everything of Function x) since that's how the thing works..
Put one input into function x it gives you 2..
That statement hasn't made sense since it was created..
But, Perhaps the situation is reversed..🤣🤣🤣
I just found that exponential functions use "Puportionality Constants as limits..
Which makes our simple into more complex scenarios..
0 
3 hours ago, Bufofrog said:
x^2 does not equal x/x, it equals x*x.
Oops sorry I was referring to the default base of ten, I should have mentioned this..
But isn't that "still" a relavant question to the OP??
6 hours ago, OldChemE said:I too am somewhat confusedabout what you are really asking. maybe you need to explain your question further. But starting with what you have.... There are not two input values in any given equation the value of x can only be one number at any given time. So, there is really only 1 input. For any given equation there might be more than one value of x that satisfies the equation but only one value may be used each time you use the equation.
In this instance, if x^2 = x/x = 1, then x = 1
So only one value may be used each time you use the equation..
Let's say f(x) where x is a distance variable and y is a time variable..
As in distance/time = a quantity at some rate per unit of time....
In this sceneraio what is x then??
Its seems to be "distance, time and rate"
There is a logic to why I ask about something so simple, yet seldom talked about or at least I've noticed...
Should x just be a rate of base 10???
That is the default of algebra and is the reason for ""like terms"" such as x/x = 1 or x^2....All bundled up together??
Something does not appear correct here..
1 
1 hour ago, swansont said:!
Moderator Note
Your idea?
Do you have something to post in speculations, that would comply with the rules, or are you asking questions? You can’t do both at once.
I'd agree to move this to speculations...
its a good read..
0 
23 minutes ago, swansont said:!
Moderator Note
Your topic is length contraction and refraction.
In case it hasn’t been made clear: length contraction (a phenomenon from relativity) is not caused by refraction (an optical effect). Which of these two topics do you wish to discuss?
(and no, light is not frozen)
Maybe light is "refined."
But this makes matters very confusing now due in part of how "radio" transmission travels at light speeds in "any medium."
My idea behind light being frozen, is that "space" has no medium...
I'm not sure if I can answer your question..I think the emission and absorption idea is 100% correct..
Why??
"Particles have spin and act as little magents."
"Heat Energy is Quantized"
"Radio transmission travels at the speed of light." 3*10^8
Still not sure where that 3 comes from though.
"Then we have:
"The Heat Transfer" Ideas."
0 
On 12/21/2020 at 2:28 PM, wtf said:
I wish to refine this statement because it's a common point of confusion.
You have no proof that "At every point on the curve of the function, you can draw a tangent line, such that 1 point ( only ) is common to both," nor do you have a rigorous definition of what a tangent line is.
Rather, we have an INTUITION about what a tangent line is. In order to make the notion rigorous, we DEFINE the tangent line at a point to be the straight line passing through that point with slope equal to the derivative at that point, if the derivative exists.
That is, the the slope of the tangent line is NOT "equivalent" to the derivative; rather, it's DEFINED that way. The idea is to make precise the intuitive idea of the tangent line at a point. If you think (as students often do) that the derivative is "the same" as the slope of the tangent line, that's a misunderstanding of what's going on. There is no tangent line, formally, until we define it via the derivative.
Then (for example) we can make rigorous the intuitively clear observation that the graph of x has no tangent line at 0. Otherwise, we could have no proof, since without the derivative we have only an intuitive but not a rigorous notion of tangent line.
This does make my issue "more clear" as ""it is"" one point in between 2 locations, but not sure how 2 inputs for x connects the dots together "from the curve" this points "touches" on the surface of this curve..
""This is my idea""
It leads me to think of the logic behind calculus and ""triangles"" and the all too good pythagorean theorem, and believe it or not the ideas behind if a derivitive can be found "depending on what "point" ""the angle"" is found obviously 360, 90, 180, and 270 all =0 at least in our modern coorodinent system....
Note: I get this idea from particles in a B field, ie Alternating Currents..
0 
1 hour ago, MigL said:
In a medium, depending on its properties, light is effectively slowed down by absorption, and reemission, by the electrons in the constituent atoms.
This process adds time; In 'between' atoms, light travels at c.There is no time dilation.
If by 'variable' you mean relative, both time and length are relative and 'related'.
I thought so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But none of my books tell me this, or at least simplified it as you did.
So then!!!!!!!!
"Light" is frozen and the only way it can "transform into heat" is through obsorbtion through a medium or gas??? "Note: particles act as little magnets too."
Now if light is frozen: what is time and where did it emerge? Hmmmm..
Is this related to permeability??
What im getting at is that it would appear "light" is frozen or ionic, predictable in a sense through geometry, ie hexagonal topologies, homogeneous, triangulated etc etc..
Is this anology correct?
0 
If x^2 = x/x = 1, why does 1 depend on 2 input values???
I get this idea from y' = 2x
What if an input value was 3, does that make x cubed??????
y' =x^3
I'm totally confused..
1 
19 hours ago, MigL said:
Refraction is when incident light bends towards the normal, on entry into a denser medium; this is caused by the 'slowing' of light by absorption and reemission.
What do you think is length contracted ?In my opinion, I think "time' itself is contracted, becuase length is a "variable."...Why else would light bend towards the normal??
If light is slowing down in denser mediums "What" causes retransmission of light? The medium "field" itself?
And is the speed of retransmission proportional to its slowing down speed?
Meaning that does retransmission of light travel slow in mediums too????
0
Whats 2+6 ??
in Mathematics
Posted · Edited by CuriosOne
If there is an equal amount of 1/2 fractions of pennies, they can be "glued" together to make them whole again..
"How About That?"
12 "one halves" of 1 penny
As
6 10ths of a "deci meter" of 1 second
""Six Tenths""
Again, How about that??
""Thanks For The Image"""
Neither am I...Apparently though I'm onto something greater than u can imagine..