Harlequinne

To be detectable the Higgs-Boson must be at odds with what is already known.By that I mean it must be contrasted against the foreground knowledge.And not part of the landscape.If we say matter is neutral then Higgs Boson might not be.If we say matter is 3-d can we say that Higgs-Boson is 4-d?

Energy can be stored in systems.like forces acting on an object is energy.

not stationary........A ball dropped from a height has Kinetic Energy when acclelrating and in turn loses an equal amount of Potential energy.

Sunlight is energy,as is coal.Empty space has least energy,and the sun has alot.E does not equal mc^2 however as one day the sun will burn out,i assume.What is the energy of a pile of rubble? It doesn't have any.

e is a number spiral written on squared paper.1. up to two.one to the right to three.one down to four and again one down to five.THAT relationship is what e is.that expanse of a square...the same unending square.so it also has no rate of change decipherable and the area underneath is the same ratio.

In the shower this morning, I suddenly got the idea of calculating the surface area of a sphere as an integral of circumferences.

 

My approach is as follows:

 

The integral is [math] 2\cdot \int_0^r 2\pi t dt [/math] where the "2" in front accounts for the surface area of whole sphere (equivalent to having [math]2r[/math] as upper limit in the integral - by symmetry).

 

The result is then [math]2\cdot 2\pi [\frac{1}{2}t^2]_0^r[/math] giving [math]4\pi \frac{1}{2}r^2[/math] or [math]2\pi r^2[/math] which is wrong.

 

Where did I go wrong?

Integrate 2pi r you get pi r^2. Now you must start afresh from 4 pi r^2.

and integrate to 4/3 pi r^3.

i think.i failed my a-levels.

Maxwell himself asserted it was his purpose to translate light phenomena to math (Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism). Physics is not an ancilla mathematicae. Physics must be supported by reason and human logic, not by mathematical calculus. For example, infinitesimal calculus is mathematically useful, but it is logically false, as Leibnitz himself admitted.

y=x^2 i thought was a cracker in favour of calculus.very subtle!!

i saw a program about drilling holes through the earth and all holes from one Chord of the earth to another,even in the next town from you,or even from here to australia,would take exactly 43 minutes to fall through!

the straightest line between two random points or a grouping OF groups in an INFINTITE

domain,in my mind renders the problem immediately unquantifiable. The straightest line is sometimes the quickest way but not always,particularly given all possibilities.

Remeber that the fastest route has to be found via algorithm.I find common sense to be more efficient.in the usa with cities away from the centre makes a good map of problem at hand.Given all cities must be visited,the computation is impossible or is it? This is the question ,yes? my question was a)the route-finding or every possible permutation of every journey is sequential and systematic,like odds in Poker,at least the research.

b)the mileometer then clocks it up,using plus.IF an efficient path is found and an alternative route discovered what if a minus sign comes into use? Does that differentiate between N¬NP? Also contrast between choices...how is ¬NP defined?

the manipulation of operations could make it be seen incompatible.

Also,where is the equals sign? when do they equate?

I am working on another eighteen relativity's as we speak

muchos gratias

1+2+3+4+5+6+7+(8x9)

E,k?

I even routinely do calculations in non-integer numbers of dimensions.

what is the picture you paint?

what is an integer dimension,and what is a non-integer dimension?

My skepticism is probably just because of ignorance, but....

 

Regarding the double slit experiment when observing particles before the slit:

 

Since the observation of a particle before going into a slit is an interaction between the detector and the particle, could the change be just a result of the interaction, not really the observation, itself?

 

In other words, could the reduction of the wave be just a physical result of the detector's interaction?

 

What process do they use to detect the particle in mid-flight, anyways?

If you would like an interpretation of it I will gladly tell you what is going on.Theoretical Physics couldn't be more wrong about particles of light if it tried.How to have half a particle?If you were to spray the light from a torch left and right all over a wall,you would not see dots/particles unless the torch moved faster than light.

Not quite. The correct expression would be: Joules divided by Kilograms are equivalent to metres-squared per second-squared.

Newton meters/wg=square of light speed?

I feel that the units are inconsistent.could you break it down for me,please?

Impossible.If two planes flew around the world at different speeds,one touches down first it shows a retarded time.By the same logic the rates the clocks move while the other plane is in the air touchING down the clock would show retarding in relation to the static clock aboard the plane that already landed and would show the same time when they met up.Einstein is wrong.I am sorry.

I don't know what you had in mind, but if you pick everything to be [math]Z_{2}[/math] graded then the notion of symmetry and antisymmetry become the same.

HI!

I was wondering if you could,you know show me how to find that script on the web someday sailor............

But seriously,I am a man and wondered if I can get the necessary stuff,because c^2 is a bit lame!!

The wheel,was quantifiably efficient.Control of the fluke when Adam saw a fallen tree,and thought to himself I'll use its rolling capacity.

The most 'true' aspect of a problem represents a stepping stone.Whether the right or wrong path is represented.A form of clarity ensues.Development thus.

The comprehension of Newtons theory of Light.(linearity)

Young's double-slit experiment.What is it similar to?What do we lean on from experience?How is the same phenomenon in light,suitably revealing to future generations?

The use of logic is of paramount importance.Fluid comprehension,of a justified nature.

A possible order to your question,provided phenomenon comes first,might be:

Phenomenon,comprehension through logic,quantification so that 'order' is proven via the facts.And these facts can be measures of Genius or they can be for the layperson.Their constituent parts are necessarily true.The truest line is always sought.The falsest is just that.It doesn't make it useless,but it must be recognised as 'not an option'. etc...... Nobody said rocket science was easy..just look at Discovery by NASA. That was my design when I almost killed myself as a child!But it is certainly cost effective.

Maybe Einstein is incorrect. If I had digital clocks,what then?

My skepticism is probably just because of ignorance, but....

 

Regarding the double slit experiment when observing particles before the slit:

 

Since the observation of a particle before going into a slit is an interaction between the detector and the particle, could the change be just a result of the interaction, not really the observation, itself?

 

In other words, could the reduction of the wave be just a physical result of the detector's interaction?

 

What process do they use to detect the particle in mid-flight, anyways?

Hi............I have a full description of the double slit if you'd like it.

If light is a pulse or spherical in shape,like a ballon expanding at light-speed, the particles are not that at all,they are the 'tip' of a sphere!

ask me another...........

If the Doggfather were to literally push Stephen Hawking...why doesn't Snoop Doggy Dogg roll backwards?

If Space-Time is curved,where does the vacuum fit into all of this?

Is it fair to say,that a ball 'rolling' around the Sun,must have been a fair amount of logical acrobatics on Einstein's part,but it still remains to be said that the warping could be in any direction,and not necessarily horizontal?

So,which way does the Orbit take place? Where is the warping? Why not have Vertically Orbiting paths?

Have you seen the experiment where two spheres are hung from a ceiling by steel thread? The balls seem to attract. Could it be then, that circle and sphere are indistinct? And that could also account for warpage!

Affirmatives.

if Space is infinite,which is logically consistent,could that explain an over-abundance of Dark Matter?

If a telescope were to FOCUS,as Hubbles would,could that explain the apparent expansion of the universe.......?

Do Joules divided by Kilograms per Square Meter equal Miles per Hour?

ie does E=mc^2?