studiot

Sorry I should have said s and d orbitals are switched. The sequence you posted 1s1 2s1 2p3 3s1 3p3 4s1 3d5 4p3 5s1 4d5 1 1 3 1 3 1 5 3 1 5... The sequence I posted 1s1 2s1 2p3 3s1 3p3 3d5 4s1 4p3 4d5 5s1 1 1 3 1 3 5 1 3 5 1... What happens when you introduce the f orbitals?

Why have you switched the order of the d an p orbitals to create your sequence? Note also the comments about up spin in d orbitals in the first attachment.

Why so aggresive? Yes I did read the paper you referenced. And I thanked you for it. I may have misread Tappert's paper, but I thought he only had one method of assessment, that of resin. He did indeed append a long list of references to his paper instead of developing his own analysis, as is de rigour these days. Since you (correctly) say that Tappert includes Berner, why are you quibbling with my sources, instead of progressing the discussion?

There must be more to this question so post the actual question and preferably the circuit. In particular what do they mean by order? Polarity? Connection with a voltmeter as well? Position in circuit?

I'll leave the geography of Oz to those who know much much more about it than I do. Edit I see our cricket team has reverted to type after an uncharacteristic lapse when they actually won something.

No it doesn't, it is non linear. This make a huge difference as the distance gets larger than about 10km. A good approximation, used by surveyors, for sightable distances (It won't work for a quarter circle) is Difference between a circular curve and a straight line tangent = (Length of sight)2 / 2R where R is the radius of the Earth.

Since we are having a revival of old methods love in Another fine method of multiplication is by quarter squares. Tables for this and other purposes used to be published regualrly. https://www.cut-the-knot.org/arithmetic/TablesForMultiplication.shtml

Stable Carbon Isotopes of C3 Plant Resins & Ambers Record Changes in Atmopsheric Oxygen Since the Triassic - https://www.eas.ualberta.ca/wolfe/eprints/Tappert_GCA_2013.pdf Thank you for your reference, no I was not aware of that work. However I noted that your figures are very different from the Berner and Canfield curve I posted. In particular Tappert's works appears to follow only one source of information, whereas the B & C curve was constructed from several corroborating independent sources of data. One of those sources is noted as the 'atomic abundance' on my post. Not only where isotopes of carbon used as with Tappert but also isotopes of Sulphur. However their assessment method was different in that it was the relative abundance in various sedimentary facies that was taken rather than abundance in observed fossil resins. It should be noted that there is considerably more rock than resin and correspondingly more data that way. But a particular stumbling block, as I see it, is your flat assertion that oxygen levels fell below 13%, which is accepted as the charcoal formation threshold. ref: Nature 290 428 Cope and Challoner. If oxygen levels fell several points below the charcoal formation threshold, where did the fossil charcoal from those time periods come from? This is not to say that we should reject Tappert's work outright or fail to incorporate it into a revised and hopefully improved paleo atmospheric history. It is, after all, a genuine new method and source of data.

No he used the word strict or strictly, which I take to have the same meaning when taken in the context of his surrounding text.

Yes of course you should explain why the strict exact Einstinian theory is not only better than the Beckmann one, but is also the best we have.

I do believe that the OP specified exact three times within the first seven posts. Therefore any approximation that disregards something on account of insignificance is not acceptable within the bounds of this thread and perhaps off topic?

If gravity is there how can you ignore GR? And how can you say a body doesn't 'feel' the gravity? No the abscence of gravity is called weightlessness. If gravity is present, space is 'warped' and GR is required.

Talking of simplicity and the Babylonians, you may like to know that computers use the babylonian method of multiplication. That is they don't, they use the babylonian 'doubling and halving' method you may have heard of. They do this electronically by using what are known as shift registers.

The definition of free fall is that the body is moving under the influence of no other force than gravity. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=definition+of+free+fall&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=b6OgWeHDCqbHXriplbAC

Hello Craiger and welcome. First of all, full marks for wanting to use your brain. +1 Please note that square roots are very important so square root algorithms have been discussed for hundreds of years and there are probably hundred of methods about. So no it's not too simple at all. You may remember or may never have done logs but here is one method. if y = an then if we take logs of both sides (rememebr you don't change an equation if you do the same thing to both sides) log y = n log (a) So if we take the log of 1863 and divide it by 2 (multiply it by 0.5) we have the log of the square root of a. So taking the antilog of this give us the square root. This method works for other roots besides square roots, including awkward fractional powers used in some Physics equations. Another method that is simple is the 'bracketing method' You can work on one place digit at a time, to any desired dgeree of accuracy. It works like this (40)2 = 1600 (50)2 = 2500 So the root is bwtween 40 and 50 since (40)2 is less than 1869 and (50)2 is greater than 1869 So the first digit is a 4 But 1869 is closer to (40)2 than to (50)2 so try numbers below 45 (42)2 = 1764 (43)2 = 1849 (44)2 = 1936 So (43)2 is less than 1869 but (44)2 is greater than 1869 So the root lies between 43 and 44 so the second digit is a 3. You can continue this process for as many digits as you like, without having to work out complicated formulae. And you know that when you arrive you have the correct answer. Self checking processes are the best.

The OP specified that only the balls that enter holes need be classified. None of those that miss need be processed in this way. Golfers (presumably I am not one) wish to practise with the brand of golf ball they will use in real games/matches. Using modified balls ties them to one type.

Thanks A54. So far my examples have involved significant conversion but more subtle effects are also used. The rotational energy is used to drive a linear adjustment system in both a steam governor and the advance/retard mechanism in an IC engine electromechanical distributor. When the requirement from the OP is clearer then the answers can be more focused, as here

Off topic? A correctly operated hand hammer "converts angular momentum to linear momentum." But this part of the same sentence is mechanically unsound. " releasing isolated portions of that centripetal force in tangent to rotation" So which is preferable Helping a fellow member develop a mechanically sound proposition or Everybody sniping and squabbling and going away grumpy?

Depends where the balls go after they have gone in the holes. If there is an automatic ball collection system from the holes the measurement of which hole does not have to be at entry and there are umpteen possible ways of sorting and triggering points application. Please ask a mod to cancel your double post.

I did say So I am trying to point this thread in the direction of a mechanically correct proposition. Swansont was, of course, quite correct there. Note also that the propellor on a ship or aircraft also converts rotational energy to translational (for the body concerned). It have also seen serious propositions to store energy in the high speed rotation of heavy flywheels, to later be used to drive vehicles. This is instead of a conventional IC engine or battery.

I think we are being abnormally hard on abnormallyhonest so I am going to place +1 for encouragement. Remember David and Goliath? It was called a slingshot. Another way that the rotational energy can be converted to translational is used in a children's toy called a spinner-copter. And also, of course, in a real helicopter, it is the source of lift generation.

I thought when you posted before that a good place to start would be understanding variables, so what do you know about types of variable? Do you understand the terms Independent Dependent Extrinsic Intrinsic Extensive Intensive Scalar Vector Component Coefficient Constant Parameter Some of these have more significance in Maths, some in Physics. You will need to know and understand what all of these are to understand equations in general, differentials equations more particularly and your chosen differential equations in particular. That will be a good start but there is much much more after 5 thousand years of maths development.

I once had a teacher who said " The more times you write something down, the greater the danger is that you will remember it." So here goes. When I was at university in the 1960s I started taking some scientific magazines. I soon encountered your problem, but worse because there were many things I could not (fully) understand or realise the significance of. So I got a pack of 6" x 4" cardex cards and started an index. The card headings were initially conditioned by the subject titles in the mags. New cards were started as new articles arose. Later I learned to add particularly useful bits inside some of the articles. So I started with say the card power supply. This was followed by a new card just for regulators Eventually the cards were stored in a suitable card drawer. I have kept this up ever since and continued widening the scope. Cross reference cards were also introduced to help searching. Sometimes photocopied articles from other sources were added and stored in File boxes. Some revision was also undertaken as I gained knowledge and experience. The cards were colour coded according to subject type so when I started wrting down the titles etc of books I thought worth noting I used pink cards. So I have generated a wide ranging library of articles and knowledge going back to the 1960s as a result, that is easy to extend and modify as you go along.

Stop arguing and get on with it. Never argue with the ref.