# Zolar V

Senior Members

645

1

1. ## A small poll on Maths

what, may i ask, is Dyscalculia?
2. ## A small poll on Maths

its quite simple really, algebra is used in day to day stuff though we do not notice it. and calculus is genrally used for things that require advanced math, such as science applications, modeling, and so forth.

the fallacies of math simply lays in its foundation of human invention. any language that has its base from humans, is going to have events that cannot be describe or have not been described.
4. ## magnets coupled with electricity

hmm, i wil take that into consideration next time i review the effects of magnetic fields on electric current. however, could you please explain the equation, i have taken highschool physics, and will be taking physics later on once i get into college after the airforce could you also refrence an equation for the strength of an magentic force, with force applied in a circular motion to create electricity. I would like to compare the forces involved

its alright, im no math genius, rather i enjoy challenging your illogic!
6. ## magnets coupled with electricity

so what would then be the proportion of magnetic fields producing electric current? I find it very hard to believe that a magnet can so easily produce a current but have a near nill affect on a current. Maby it would be better to study the affects of magentism not on electricity but on plasma
7. ## magnets coupled with electricity

hmm.. i dont know, iv used some pretty poowerful magnets against both arc between a cut wire and a lightning bolt from a teslacoil, both on the bolt in air, and when the coil is near enough to an object to arc
8. ## magnets coupled with electricity

I think i might have to clarify what i am questioning. why does the magnetic fields not affect visibly the electrical stream between 2 points of a electric arc.
9. ## magnets coupled with electricity

why dont magnets affect an electric stream

this is quite simple, if you divide 10 by 3 on any calculator or ask any professior, it/they will say that it is 3.3 to the inf yet this is fundimentaly wrong you do not get an infitite number when dividing 2 finite numbers so there fore 10 /3 = a number yet the reason we define it as inf is due to our lack of a word to describe said event the same applies to dividing by square roots, there is no need to multiply by resipricals as there is to reformulate the equation all that needs to be done is invent a new numeric language that accounts for all of the fallacies of the current one
×