Pat Says

For the most part I don't think creationists deny evolution. Evolution is a fact, it happens in front of our very eyes all the time. The only debatable part is the fact of whether evolution is how life started or not. I personally believe that a God may exist and may have created the uni(multi?)verse and allowed for evolution to happen. I think it is terribly close-minded to 'know' that there is no God no matter what (not saying that anyone here is like that). So, does this make me a creationist if I believe that a God may have allowed for the evolutionary process to happen?

One of these is the maximum... the other is the minimum.

Just create a sign chart. Test a couple of points and drop your extraneous points too.

It should read V = (1/3) \\pi r^2 h, not V = (1/3) (2 \\pi r) h

Hmm, that's weird because his equation (with the errors) had a max at theta = pi... which is, I'm guessing, the actual answer. Strange coincidence or maybe it just works out the same only with different constants?

Yeah, it takes effing forever to find the derivative and then to solve for zero by hand but it can be done. The answer actually does turn out to be pi though so it is symmetrical. Arg solving for zero manually would be very tedious... Just use a the solver on your calculator .

Yeah, I dunno exactly know what he means by algebra alone. Becuase to find the max you don't have to graph it.

I guess what I was asking is that you don't have to physically graph to find the max (can find where the rate = 0 ) so does that count? But, it sounds like you don't want to use rates. Otherwise, can't say I know how to do it. Other than I guess theta would equal pi (radians). Can you maybe show somewhere along the lines of what you did to give a hint or something?

Do you mean all algebraicly or just no graphing. Because you could create a formula and find the max using calculus (no actual graphing involved). And I'm just guessing but wouldn't it always come out to be half of the circle?

Good luck with volume, it might be a hard one to show... gonna need pics for that :/.

Yeah, I was talking about #7 on the syllabus . I've never done any 3 variable (x,y,z) stuff. I'd go for that.. and if that seems like too far down the road I wouldn't mind creating some tuts (that you can edit or whatever) on less advanced stuff like quotient rule, L'Hopitals, area etc.

I already know what you've taught so far so I have only glimpsed at them. But, how much more do you plan on teaching? I would definitely be interested in some more advanced stuff.

I checked it, nothing wrong at all.

Thanks for all your help. Now, for the hard part... how would I make the thing? Oh well, I hope I'll figure something out eventually.

I really don't think they have to charge the dust now that I think about it. Dust is many' date=' many types of particles, all of which have different charges I am sure. The feather dusters just create static and attract the dust particles that do have charges. Since dust is really a big clump of matter, there could be charged and non-charged particles in this clump. The charged particles are attracted and the non charged particles that are in the clump just follow, sorta. I hope that helps.

 

EDIT: And since the dust is obviously already on teh screen, I assume they already have a charge, or they wouldn't stay would they?[/quote']

 

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, otherwise nothing else would make sense (the feather duster and t.v. circles). And as for the edit part, I'd assume so... but you know what assuming does?

 

lets just stick with dusting the screen

I never said anything otherwise.

 

Here's what I said to use the mats on: "I was thinking of putting the mats (like they can replace normal cloth ones used for protecting the furniture.. like lamps and pictures are put on top of) on coffee tables, under lamps, dressers, night stands etc."

 

I also said this, which cleared up any possibility of using it on a t.v. :" No no, I didn't mean to put anything on the t.v."

So are you saying that it charges the dust and then attracts it? Err, I don't know if I understand what you're saying.

Oh, yeah. I was wondering about that.. if the dust isn't charged how do those feather dusters work? (the kind where you 'charge' them up by rubbing them against a t.v. that is on.)

No no, I didn't mean to put anything on the t.v. I was just explaining where I got the idea from. I was thinking of putting the mats (like they can replace normal cloth ones used for protecting the furniture.. like lamps and pictures are put on top of) on coffee tables, under lamps, dressers, night stands etc.

or u could get an ionic breeze from menards that does the same thing

I looked at those and they only filter the air. This means that dust will still collect on surfaces (albeit slower) and the occasional dusting will still be necessary.

ah yeah... that makes sense... I guess the H2 would be pretty stable.

Hmm... I guess not. I never thought it through thaat much. I was just noticing how all the dust collected in a circle on the t.v. screen and was trying to put it to good use :/.

the cirlcles of dust are u reffering to like a lamp on top of it???

I came up with this while cleaning: You know how dust forms in a circle on a t.v. that hasn't been cleaned... well, I am pretty sure this is due to the static electricity. So, I was wondering if I could use place mats (like under lamps) that used static electricity to collect the dust on the surrounding surface thereby elimanting the need to dust. I was thinking you could plug it in or charge it etc. How feasible is this idea and if it is feasible how would you create the static?

So as it leaks would it eventually leave a pool of water on the ground?

Lol, you could video tape it:). I wonder why they call it an alligator... it doesn't even really look like one.

Spiders that eat mice?

*note: be patient, the mouse just walks around for awhile.

I went to Oregon and Washington (thanks for asking ). Went to the coast and saw a few mountains (Rainier, St. Helens, Hood, Baker). We mainly went for my cousin's wedding but I had lots of fun though, got to see a lot of cousins I don't see that often.

Ah, yeah sorry about that, I wasn't clear enough. I was referring to post 11#, yours makes sense.

As far as the Xenon fuel being used: Early ion engines (SERT I and II missions) used Mercury and Cesium as fuel. Over the past 3 decades or so, the industry has settled on Xenon due to lack of corrosive effects and much safer handling conditions. One has to consider environmental effects and safety precautions driving up the cost of developing any type of propulsion method.

I think calbiterol might be referring to all propulsion techniques in general... I was just trying to make sure I wasn't missing anything.

I do have to question his business plan though. Just how big of a market exists for a space hotel? He plans on charging $1 million dollars a night!!!! He may have made a lot of money with his Vegas hotel chain, but he's not exactly Steve Wynn or Donald Trump. Bigelow's bread and butter is discount hotels. I wish him luck.

Hopefully his frugalness can overcome that . As for the 1 million a night... I think people would try it.

and AERA does seem like all hype... it doesn't seem like they have put enough time into (only started in 2002) it.

Duh, I wasn't even thinking about storage of cesium... thats where it would be corrosive. But, how can it be environmentally unsafe? I don't think an Ion Engine would even be feasible in an atmosphere.

"just, after the velocity of the particles is reached, the particles will still be moving in a forward direction even after being pushed out the back. I (kind of) understand, but I don't think I'm going to be able to put it into words."

Ah yeah I kind of understand what you are saying. But, I think since the velocity can only be approached it would still travel backwards... just really, really slowly.

(sorry for the delay in response, I've been away on vacation)

Really? That seems weird. Im just postulating but wouldn't it only be able to speed up as fast as the thrust is going?

(if not can you explain?)