swaha

B(m,n)=gamma(m).gamma(n)/gamma(m+n)

while changing the variables x to rcosz, y=rsinz and taking their differentials we tactly assume the terms containing (dz)^2 & (dr)^2 terms vanish. we only consider terms containing dzdr in the double integral in place of dxdy can somebody please explain why (dz)^2 & (dr)^2 terms vanish or not considered for the double integral?

if something expanda then it requires space outside. does it mean there is space outside universe also? atleast it must be when it was a point. for a point must be somewhere in space & expand to somewhere in space to occupy a volume.

whether the universe expands or the galaxies move away from each other at a greater speed of light the relative velocity remains greater than the speed of the light. does it mean the reference frame of those galaxies they are at our past?

i am a 1st yr undergraduate student in physics honours. have interests in fields like relativity, quantum, cosmology physics. want to know about research oportunities for me in pg courses. any expert ideas will be appreciated. thank you.

what if the force is impulsive? no pushing case.

well since we are accelerating without something stopping us can some day we reah the speed of light?

gravitational energy is actually a bound state one so why universe needs to expand i really dont get it. 2 things can separate if some repulsive force exists else why move leaving the bound state? actualy the place i stay asking questions to teachers is almost a crime so i really dont get any help regarding what i want to know. pls explain it.

why do you think there is a time dialation when they reach the same speed please explain?

is there any proof? actually gravitational force is attractive so it should be shrinking by the way if it had to. pls explain where i was wrong.

ya. is there harm supposing what a light would observe?

actually infinite no of times a person is allowed to see the event, just dont understand then y dont we really do????????????

Merged post follows:

ok lets forget about the reference frame moves at vel c.let it move with some uless than c. still there is the problem.

does it mean that L should vary with t2-t1 to keep S a constant?

but the ballon was initially at a point. so where was the universe?

no. i dont care whaether it converges or not, for the time being atleast. what i wanted to know really was that if say f(x) is a function of period 2pi. then y is it supposed to be able to be written as linear combinations of functions of sines & cosines their angles being multiples of 2pi always?

it's easy to understand the opposite way instead if there is a linear combination of sines & cosines of multiples of 2pi then the lcm of their periods become 2pi hence the combined function has the period 2pi.

but our books state the 1st one regarding shm as fourier series.

somebody please explain this i really didnt get it anywhere.

what did u mean by that point was everywhere? a point must be somewhere located in space?

Merged post follows:

nobody gave me any ballon idea. dont know what's it.

shouldnt the speed of light be zero wrt itself?

how can the rest frame of something be unphysical which exists itself?

please define what is meant by S, L here.

well but he must have given a proof of the statement i suppose. i didnt find it anywhere.

ok thanks. let's focus on the problem now.

how did matter appear then? was it stored somewhere probably as energy? did you mean the point enlarged to our universe? please explain.

Merged post follows:

well again if our universe was a point then where was it?

what's meant by a QM text book? please reply.

The invariant quantity is the so called interval that includes time. In this sense it serves as a forth coordinate r4=i*ct in a four-dimentional space (r,i*ct

But time also vaiers in different reference frames. wasnt it the light velocity that remained invariant? got confused again. help.

Merged post follows:

i beg ur pardon for i had to copy paste what mr bob has written. i dont know how to use this quoting stuff here. sorry.

well i didnt find it anywhere, please help me with sites where to find the proof if u wont like typing.

well its easy to understand that if the rhs is true the lhs will be a periodic function for the lcm of the period remains same not the vice versa. plese give me the proof.

did u mean that we are uncertain not by laking instruments but shall always be? but why cant we measure correctly if we can make an errorfree instrument? please explain.

electric & magnetic fields oscillate so it's got a frequency.