Kedas

some news

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8061

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg18825201.200

found some info here

http://www.metanexus.net/ultimate_reality/zeilinger.pdf

and this one

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/quantum_astronomy_041216.html

it's more like psychology than physics.

Surely if it is completely unretrevable and always will be then for the sake of any meaningful value it is not there?

If we can't detect any black matter then it isn't there. You must realize that this is calling it different based on what you don't know yet.

Besides I don't think that the heisenberg uncertainty principle wil survive the next 50 years.

if you could measure every single parameter of a neutrion(radius(if it has one), mass, velocity,position, shape, coordinate map, etc.) to infinite accuracy then the amount of information would be infinite. this ignores the planck legnth heisenberg uncertaintity principle and probably some others that have/have not been discovered

So what are you trying to say that it isn't infinite because of planck etc...?

I already assumed that.

You have to define 'Information' before you can measure its value.

My definition of information in my question: everything you need to define it exactely at a certain time.

I don't think the heisenberg uncertainty principle has anything to do with it.

It's not because we can't retreive the information that it isn't there.

So you say that an neutrino contains an infinite amount of information??

I don't want to store it I only want to know how much there is.

"even with winrar" that was funny

Doesn't the amount of information stay the same even if you compress it.

edit:

Found this article that gives some idea's

http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~mpf/lec3.html

and this one:

http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~akempf/summary.shtml

Hi,

Does someone know if there is a way to calculate the amount of information of something (object, area, atom)? Would it have a unit?

I just want to add the reason why it's called 'Intelligent design' and not 'The creation of God' or something like that.

They would have trouble with the First Amendment

"Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion."

So the name ID is just a new package of the same thing to avoid conflict with the First Amendment.

older news:

The use of primitive tools by apes and even some birds is not unusual, but Antonio C. de A. Moura of Darwin College and Phyllis C. Lee of the University of Cambridge, both in Cambridge, England, say in Science that they have now observed capuchin monkeys using rocks to gather food during the dry season in Brazil.

Captive capuchins have been easily taught to use simple tools, but scientists speculated that the wild animal doesn’t use tools because food is so abundant there is no need for them, the researchers say.

Maybe they start using tools now because they didn't need them before.

The same is true for humans according to history many more inventions are made during a war/crisis.

Do you think we would know how to make an atom-bom if there weren't some big wars in our past?

http://www.math.montana.edu/frankw/ccp/calculus/des/intro/cooling.htm

here you have a complete worked out example:

http://v5o5jotqkgfu3btr91t7w5fhzedjaoaz8igl.unbsj.ca/~talderso/UWOnotes/UNIT10.pdf

I have a similar problem. If I have a 100 gram copper sphere immersed in liquid nitrogen for an hour it would have a temperature of 77K. If I take it out an put it in "still" air at 300K, how long would it take it to come to 300K? Can that be calculated for "still" air?

Can you measure the temperature of the sphere?

What you can do is making it half theoretical half imperial.

Put the sphere in the freezer (no liquid nitrogen required)

after a while measure the temp take it out wait 10minutes and measure the temp again.

The time and temp change will give you a constant that you need in the formula to calculate any temp change for any time.

Sure you can, since they are equal mass and are exchanging ther heat with the same reservoir. The one with the larger initial slope has the smaller heat capacity - it transfers about the same amount of energy in some small time interval, since the temperature difference is the same, but its temperature drops more.

You assume that their heat transfer is the same at temperature T for both.

If one has twice the surface in contact with the cooler body it will cool faster. (with the same heat capacity)

Many friends in this forum told me that the rate of transfer of heat mainly depends on the difference in temperature rather than difference in specific heat capacity.

here's an example' date=' what's the answer from you?[/quote']

 

The temperature change won't be linear like in the graph because the temperature difference will constanly decrease. (assuming the air temp doesn't change)

You will have an exponential curve. like unloading a capacitor with a resistor.

the really tricky thing here is' date=' how do you define the sum of energy??

 

since of course, water also has energy even when it's at 0c....

 

probably you people have to show me with equations to demonstrate your view..[/quote']

 

You don't need to know the energy at 0°C since that same energy is also present after you mix them.

If you assume that the energy in the water up to 0°c = x.V (x is an unknown number)

So the ernegy equation would be:

x.V1 + T1.c.V1 + x.V2 + T2.c.V2 = x.V1 + x.V2 + Tm.c.Vm

so you don't have to know a lot of math to see that you can just remove x.V1 and x.V2

T1.c.V1 + T2.c.V2 = Tm.c.Vm

now you will also see that you can remove the heat capacity c

T1.V1 + T2.V2 = Tm.Vm (Vm=V1+V2)

I'm sure you can handle it from here.

And like mentioned before this is only valid if there is no phase transitions. (so only water)

 

one more remark in case you want to use the joules, it's the mass of the water that has to be multiplied with the heat capacity not the volume but that is a constant multiplied with the volume so it won't change your result.

Just write down the equation with at the left side the total sum of energy before the mix and at the right side total after the mix.

Then you will also notice that it's independant of the heat capacity since they are the same for both.

1. Can a current flow through in this sequence' date=' DABE can CBAE?

If yes, then the two currents meet in the branch AB with opposite direction.

Will a problem arise?

[/b']

If you want to do the left side first and then the right side then you can make a Thevenin equivalent circuit of the left part and also the right part and then connect them and calculate that current (this is your A-meter current).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/thevenin.html

you can find all basic info here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/dccircon.html#c1

Just apply Kirchhoff's law's or if you don't know that assuming that the resistance of the A-meter is zero you can just connect the two then AE and BE have the same voltage same for the other side so you can calculate the current of all resistors and the one that goes through the A-meter is the one that makes the total current in point (A or B) equal to 0.

Currents can't flow in the two direction at the same time but when you applying Kirchhoff's you don't need to know the right direction just guess one if it's the wrong direction then the calculated current wil just be negative (meaning not flowing in the direction of the arrow)

Saturn's Moon Titan is next

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/050917_titan_shore.html

You have to be more clear what you are trying because from what I see you don't really understand the meaning of a capacitor and capacity of a capacitor

Then you have lost me' date=' because you seem to be relying on a definition that is not provided there.

 

(sorry for the late reply.)[/quote']

 

Yes, the definition I gave is the one that is 'according to me' more correct now and in the future.

Why slightly different than in a current dictonary because I don't think that we will call it AI when some 'AI' get the status of lifeform and that should logicaly happen when we fail to understand its intelligent behavior.

Also if an other intelligent being would write some AI it wouldn't be AI according to current dictonary since it wan't made by humans, although everyone would stil recognize it as AI.

Well if anyone has any toughts on this I could welcome some info on such things. I believe in science and actually forseeing the future doesnt sem like possibility to me

Well predicting the future and act on it is the main task of science and your brain Some are just better than other and statisticaly an accurate hit will happen ones in a while.

Just my thoughts on it (although I know I'm right )

Give me the positions of two more points of your parabole and we can give you a and b

if you understand what is show here you will know:

http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/chemphys/reviews/u7review/u7ans3.html

You need to calculate the angle between those two lines (center earth to travelpoint)

then multiply the earth radios with that angle (in rad).

edit:

http://pollux.nss.nima.mil/calc/calc_options.html#Distance%20Calculator

some code: http://www.freevbcode.com/ShowCode.asp?ID=1793

Also organic molecules in comet

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=dn7961

http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/news/expandnews.cfm?id=597

So I'm starting to wonder from all the places we looked for (if I'm correct) then it was only the moon that didn't have organic molecules (and that is probably because we didn't look good enough.)

Aren't we getting in a situation that we will assume that there are organic molecules everywhere. (almost hard to find a place without some)

Maybe in a few decates we will find out that there are all kind of small lifeforms everywhere.