studiot

OK it was someone else, there was a lot going on in the last couple of weeks. Anyway here is the sketch. Hopefully it is not to rough for you. As you can see the teacher had laid an iron rod across to stools and hung an iron weight (the sort you find in a market where they weigh sides of beef and sacks of potatoes) in the middle. The weight was very large compared to the knot on the bandana so when he first struck the weight it hardly moved. Gradually as he kept striking the weight and he got into a rhythm the weight swung further and further , taking a couple of seconds to comple one swing. Now the important thing to consider here is when the weight is struck. If the weight is struck as in A when it is moving away from the knot the stike will be less hard. If it is struck in the same position but when the weight is moving towards the knot the strike, as in B, it be less effective and the swing will be slightly impeded. If the weight is always struck in the same place at the top of the swing as in C then it will receive the maximum impetus or impulse. So it is important to strike at the right time in each swing. This situation is called resonance. As you can see each time the weight is struck a small packet of energy is transferred to it. A better name for strike is applied force (note I have slipped in the word impulse here) We can examine these in a great deal more detail.

Hitler was a very bad person. Therefore all Germans are bad. You might well find much more amenable responses if you stopped finding one contrary statement about something, which may even be correct as your statement above is, and immediately tarring everyone else with the same brush.

I thought I had corrected that one.

Well we will be going to Cornwall at the end on next week so till later in the month But thank you for the very useful responses an please look in later tonight as I have a drawing about the swinging weight for you. I believe you said some while back that you were a 'draftsman' and 'on the scale'. Both of these are helpful to us to help you. I think in pictures, rather than words so even 60 years ago in school and now with my typing my brain is streets ahead of my writing fingers as you may have noticed from my many mistakes and sometimes jumbled words. @Mordred The correspondence Principle. I hadn't thought of that, very good to introduce to our friend +1. I was going to introduce the corespondence between Mendeleyev and the standard model however.

Why the funny slide bar ? In Roman times, the climate in the UK was much warmer and Britain was noted for wine exports. How many million years ago do you thing that was ? A bit later we had a colder period known as a mini ice age or lower dryas. There was also a younger dryass prior to the Roman period. But my main question, which remains unanswered, was

Good morning ! I have been trying to get the time to post my next installment, but I can't keep up with these flights of fancy round the universe. My whole thesis is that the overall picture of things great and small looks very similar. We are part of the larger aspect so finding and observing phenomena at our space and timescales is easier for us to appreciate. Then we can transfer some of this experience to other scales, making allowance for the the fact that whilst there are several kinds of force and several kinds of energy, different forces operate over specific ranges of distance, but energy is indifferent to distance. So to return to human scales here is a report of a physics experiment I did in school and its connection to our discussion. Aside we do not do enough hands on experiments is schools these days. / aside One day our physics teacher came into class with a large handkerchief/bandanna which he proceeded to roll up and tie a large knot in one end. Then he went to a large metal weight he had hanging between two lab stools and started swinging the bandana so that the knot hit the metal weight. He kept talking ( I forget what about) whilst he struck the weight repeatedly until he had the weight swinging to and fro. Then he told us about the experiment. It explains resonance, it explains 'little packets of energy', it explains forces, all at the pace of human observation rather than that of an electronic oscilloscope display. Are you still with me ? Edit Oh I have been meaning to ask you as I have a little bit of maths in mind. Do you know what a graph (or plot) is ?

Havanna is ~2800 km from Washington. Kiev is ~750 km from Moscow. Ukraine is not a member of Nato. Playing war games may have worked once many years ago but is silly in today's much more complicated world.

And yet you say And indeed you have provides a 15 minute computer graphics animation showing your version ! You may be good at computer graphics, but the sound track on the video is very poor so it is necessary to rewind several times to try to make clear what you words are. You have some interesting ideas, some of which have been tried before during the development of the current understanding of Plate Tectonics. I say development because that understanding has undergone many revisions, some big some small, since Continental Drift. Most of these have come about because of the cycle of rigorous comparison with observation and subsequent revision of the hypothesis. Many questions remain as yet unanswered. If you cannot engage with others in this revision process then your hypothesis will go nowhere. So let us reset this thread and start again with proper discussion.

Where did this problem come from please ? Is it coursework ? Also you should not post duplicate threads, even if you second picture is prettier than the first. It is a form of generalised Malfatti Problem in computational geometry, with the outer boundary being a circle not a triangle.

What I am suggesting is that what is happening is schools and what is happening outside schools ie in what I am calling the wider community all are linked to a common cause or trend in society. That is, of course, different from a causal relationship between each other.

Are you disputing that a far greater % of women now go out to work instead of being housewives ? I didn't mean to allude to feminism in any way. Sorry if you thought that. I am not even sure what feminism is. Perhaps you missed the part where I suggested that what is happening in schools (and colleges) reflects what is happening in society outside ?

I am reporting this video as it contains so many fallacies I couldn't count them all. So here are a quick few Why is Mars shown bigger than the Earth ans quite a lot bigger than Venus ? Where did the varous constituent elements of the planets come from ? The video say 'fusion induced by proximity to the Sun' The planets were apparantly derived from gas plasma balls ejected by the Sun. So what is the fusion pathway involved ? The american cordillera is ascribed be created as a mid pacific ridge. So why are all the rocks of the wrong type? And so on. At the end of the video other crank videos such as viruses came before life. Yet viruses require life to replicate? I agree this is just advertising the OPs You Tube panel.

Rubbish. A sphere is a two dimensional object. If you want to ask questions please do so but stop criticising what you clearly do not understand. Also 'should' is not a scientific term.

I had understood you were 'taking a break'. But from subsequent post I see that perhaps I gained the wrong impression. Anyway and others have ploughed on so here are a few thoughts. When driving an automobile we use at least two pedals. We call one the accelerator (some americans call it the gas pedal) its purpose is to develop more power for some reason. Now that reason may be to go faster (increase speed). Or it may be to change direction, whilst maintaining constant speed. (A touch on the accelerator as to get you round the bend as my long ago driving instructor used to say.) Now I have never heard of anyone calling the other pedal a decelarator, although that it what it does. Of course we call it the brake. Whenever there is an acceleration, whether the speed changes or not, there is an aassociated force or forces. Next time we will consider the difference between force and energy, a distinction so many get confused over. Amazingly Mordred is a physicist teaching you maths and I am a mathematician (retired) explaining physics. Sometimes it is worth considering from another science point of view. So explosions and expansions. Chemists distinguish explosions as reactions that accelerate indefinitely. This is either because the rate of energy input is greater than it can be distributed. Or it is because the reaction is of the 'chain' variety where there are several stages and one stage produces more than one output (next stage) for any input.

If you were not bent on criticising others you might be more prepared to discuss the subject that apparantly interests you. That involves replying to those who have bothered to answer you. What do you want from yhis three dimensional model ? Remember a model is not the territory it is an attempt to represent one or more characteristics of the 'real thing' only. Obviously one (those much criticised scientists) will choose a characteristics that are of interest and ignore or only treat lightly the rest. For example here is a model that studies the effect of plate tectonics on organic evolution.

Yes I agree the change is accelerating. But I see this as in some way linked to wider social changes. The pressure on 'instant solutions' has increased apace with the changes to working patterns and female emancipation. Fewer and fewer women today remain at home cokking the dinner (amongst other things). The commercial world has responded with greater 'sell' of ready made 'meals' and fast food more generally. So we see a declining % of the population cooking from scratch or even able to do so. Since this first started the 'role model' effect on the next generation has now had time to begin to take effect. Further pressure is coming within schools as they outsource school meals, saving money on kitchen space. This is also happening in practical subjects where workshops, sports facilities and laboratories are being reduced.

I usually say "it's complicated", but in theis case a simple question deserves a simple answer. The clue is in the word 'plate' -- Which refers to two dimensional objects. See for instance the classic work The theory of Plates and Shells Timoshenko and Goodier.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0lw0nxw71po Now for the first time scientists researching the brain of a fly have identified the position, shape and connections of every single one of its 130,000 cells and 50 million connections.

You have now posted twice since my simple questions. I see you are new here so please note the forum's requirement to support your claims.

Condolences on having a bad day, everybody has them. The good news is that after a few good/bad/goodcycles you realise that the bad parts come to an end. As I continue my tour, you may have noticed I am introducing gently new stuff as it is needed. To try to throw it at soemeone all at one would blow anyone's mind. I will come to velocity as it is needed. Although I am mentioning forces, force analysis is moree difficult than energy analysis some I am concentrating on the latter. Please re read this post where I layout the programme as I am trying to show that quarks, atoms solar systems,galaxies and so on have remarkable similarities in the way they work. There is no sharp macroscopic / microscopic divide, as is often touted. We will look at you question of what holds things together and find out that in energy terms its the same principle of least energy. Please also read this short extract from Sean Carroll - he has put the changing view of particles and fields so well, and quite sufficiently for our purposes.

Thank you it does, +1 Sounds like the (Ivor) Catt effect again. I will investigate further. Thinking about your quote, Phase delay comparison is only appropriate for continuous waves. It is inappropriate for one which is absorbed and re-emitted at some random phase. Perhaps the full text will explain it better.

Gosh so where will all the water in the atmousphere and oceans go in this unlikely scenario ? When in geological time did we ever have near 100 desert conditions, even in much hotter periods than we have or are heading for ?

Yes I agree,. I think this has been going on for longer than maybe people realise, at least in the West. I understand the Asian Tiger economies favour a more traditonal curriculum. I remember at the end of the 1990s having a disagrement with my daughter's maths teacher pre GCSE. I took an interst in the stuff they were teachi ng and asked, "well when are you going on to the final stage, GCSEs are very close now" I was referring to my recollection of 1950s/1960s school where GCE were taught. My point was that exam questions were oten in two parts. The first part demonstrated knowledge of some theorem or technique. The second part (whcih carried the most marks) demonstrated the use of that theorem. But not directly, as now. That was covered in practise before the exams. The student woudl be asked to demonstrate or calculate some result that was not directly obtainable from the material supplied. She had to understand and realise the intermediate result that was needed from the supplied material, to then obtain the final required one. This I think is what CharonY means. I I hold it is vitally important.

Since you haven't told me what you understand the 'principle of causality' you cannot claim that any, let alone all theories rely on it. My question was simply. What is your version of 'the principle of causality ?' I also told you in outline what I understand by it and in particular wha my version allows, namely that it allows tow event to be causally connected or not to be causally connected, yet be in the same light cone. It tells when two events can be causally connected, but it does not tell you they have to be. You introduced uncharged particles apparantly changing into charged particles, not I.

A slight digression from my main thrust to explain a point that Mordred keeps making. If you look at a weather map (perhaps watching the forecast on TV) you will see circular patterns of isobars travelling acrss the map. These represent cyclones or anticyclones (pairs again ? 😀). Although not solid objects they behave and feel as though they are and as folks in central Europe and south eastern US have recently found out to the great cost. They are semi persistant disturbances in the isobar field thaat can (and do) act as a single entity. In Physics, field theories regard 'particles = solid little balls' as disturbances in the same way. You can also see this effect in eddies in a stream bed. Does this help at all ?