Iwonderaboutthings

When I sated I was a retard, I had no idea "YOU ALL WOULD USE THAT" as a justified excuse to call me ignorant A NIGGER termed where I come from. I see now why gays, and lesbian never disclose their information.... YOU ARE EVIL DARK AND WICKEND! When I stated I was a retard, I had no idea "YOU ALL WOULD USE THAT" as a justified excuse to call me ignorant. I see now why gays, and lesbian never disclose their information.... YOU ARE EVIL DARK AND WICKEND! The moderators have allowed this abuse. LIKE I SAID ITS MAKES THE FORUM LOOK BAD..

I have been complaining about a member here ACME is till using insulting and very very rude comments on my behalf, while telling others to stop interacting with me, I am not sure you have received my messages about this.... I am very confused as to what is going on here, and I am even a bit concerned as to why he is doing this, the remark are on the last page... I have told ACME about this note, but they refuse to stop...

flash light????? ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, height, I see, Opps sorry.. Copied this and will practice over and over again. Just a question, can an exponent just be used like this in a calculator.. example: 4.768^-12 0000000000004.768 or 4.768^12 4.768000000000000 Or something like that.

Given Mr. Wander's I am assuming you mean Iwonderaboutthings. There is a note here by a moderator it states " no more comments about the person" and to please remain in the scope of the topic... I have stated this several times already and sent a message about this... You are 100% breaking forum rules, you do not have respect for other members kindness on my post here, and you " truly seem" to have a position of authority of which you are abusing...But not with me " baby" My forefathers have already done this for me as Slaves for 500 years.... So if this thread gets blocked and I get banned, It is because of politics and control.. IT MAKES THE FORUM LOOK BAD...

Don't mean to ask this, its just a simple observation. You say: If I thought my first answer was correct I would have provided an answer showing an example. So then, you must have known the answer to be incorrect in the 1st place? thanks

No , no one ever told me " ever" not even online that there are many ways to calculate h. Can you provide me a link that says you can?? Thanks for telling me though.. I'm not the only one going off topic either, I paused a bit their for others to get the " options" on e out of the way. As usual I am thankful for your time.

This is a simple home experiment" . I would prefer to hear this: There are many ways to calculate the h constant ... Yes? No? Its very simple.. Or maybe you simply did not know? "BUT" THANKS FOR BEING HONEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 50/50

I don't mean to to say this, and sorry but I am observing that there are more than just one way to calculate this, and maybe that is worth wondering about in relation to numbers in general...Too much input here, I wish " someone can decide" which is which... This does not make sense at all, and it's no help sorry, and it is misleading... I am now convinced some people here do not know what they are talking out, or either choose to deliberately make others " look and feel dumb" I am not the only one talking about this by the way trust me when I tell you... It makes the forum look bad.... Such a simple question and such a complex answer...Somehow I feel someone is laughing at all of us! You say: There is some conventional symbols but there is always exceptions. OK, uhmm which ones???

I was told that e means exponent..in the other thread, but this explanations makes sense, because this has me very confused, its a shame " other members" don't say anything about this, and let others look bad,

Hymmm, was that what you wanted Acme>>>??? Why did you not answer question??? I replied back to you....This is a simple case of "GANGING UP ON MEMBER'S!

Thanks Strange, I was trying to " make this point" So, this topic should be tossed out in the trash can. Taking a break from this forum, be back some time later. To all whom were patient with me, thanks you have no idea how much I have learned,,

I beg your pardon?????????????????????????????????? I have already stated that I am retarded, I have already stated that I am a drop out from highschool " because they don't want Blacks nor Latinos there, I have already stated that I get my books out from the garbage or read from the internet.. If members don't wont to deal with me, then they do so on their own free will... ACME, the member did not answer my question nor did they have anything positive to say.... They are instigating on personal issues simply because I am asking questions about taboo topics in science, something I have known to be filled with conspiracy. I am not going to tolerate abuse here plus their is already a NOTE here, about this from a moderator..... Go against your own will and wishes while breaking your own forum rules, it only makes the forum look bad. Its plain and simple, if I am such a bother to members, simply don't deal with me....

Sensei " has already" cleared that up for me, " with numerical examples" to back this up" Uhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, ANYTHING ABOUT PI RATIO THOUGH???????? That is the topic JUst SaYIng Anyway, ACME I asked for the "alpha numerical " meaning" of e I am well aware that e stands for exponent. Please don't insult my intelligence. You say The values are independent of the base chosen to represent them? I am , will and shall remain confused on this, until I understand the logic as to why>>>? For example, c = 299.792.458 m/s right?? why do calculators only accept the number as 299.792458 ??????????? Thats what I wanna know. This is what I am trying to understand about e, the alpha numeric meaning, I think you know what I am talking about. Alphanumeric (sometimes shortened to alphameric) is a combination of alphabetic and numeric characters, and is used to describe the collection of Latin letters and Arabic digits or a text constructed from this collection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphanumeric So then Your description on e appears to be a Meaningless drivel...How about that! Also are you aware that pi ratio can be used as percent? I think you also know that too. Are you reading this post correctly????? Pi and the Fibonacci Numbers http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibpi.html

What am I doing wrong with this calculation>>>??? Is it the calculator??? E=h*c/650nm = 3.056*10^-019 J 6.626^-33*299.792458 = 2.37423368261187e-25<------------------thats the way it comes out of the "online" calculator 2.37423368261187e-25/650nm = 3.65266720401826e-28<------------------thats the way it comes out of the "online" calculator thanks for the advice

If you say optical illusion, then I will go with that... When I say " standard model" pertaining to vision , I mean its not usual to see colors in contours such as the image provided... Remember the video Universal Gravitation -- Shell Theorem " on this thread" and the flash light? Do we " really create reality as we see reality " with light'??? Is this why energy and mass are described as flat space time and continuum of space? Since light comes from on single point mass-less particle "photon" , then shouldn't we be " seeing nothing at all"? Or should it be that what we see is the exact size of a light photon????? Inversely Proportional right???? I get this idea in regards to " sighting" in a mirror, sighting in a book, etc, with the human eyes.. To focus your vision in one direction or point focus. They say that all else is within infinity.. For example when you read a book, the word you focus on, is only seen, the book the room etc, everything else that you are not focused on is said to be in infinity...Right? I am thinking that when you shine light on something, it becomes real?

To stay on topic I will ask..Pi squared = percent????????????? Like this: Cl-37 has ~24% abundance I copied this for later practice... In this here: if you have 1 kg of water it's approximately 1000 / 18 = 55.555(5) mol = 3.3456*10^25 molecules of water. 1000 = kg of water, where did 18 come from??? You see I have a hard time stopping the number theory I see, very sorry about this, it happens automatically... I see patterns, I cant control that.. In this: 34.96885268 * 0.7576 + 36.96590259 * 0.2424 = 35.4529375782 36-35 = 1?? This is how I see " numbers." Not sure why all this looks like " time" and nothing else.. percent? 10^2 Pi squared = percent????????????? I will practice on this... normalization of a surface normal? equilibrium? normalization has many meanings... These are fundamental constant right? or just numbers? They appear to follow an order of operations, due to their relationships to the number 6, what ever that at this point means.. There is a connection... Wave Function uses normalizing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalisable_wave_function are you sure when you say this: You can't write 6.24*10e18 =6.24e+19 it should be 6.24*10^18=6.24e+18 6.24e+19/6.24e+18=10 They seem to 'fit in quite well" with the base of ten number system. in fact this where I specialize... Maybe we are overlooking this letter------------>e What is its alpha numerical " meaning"?

molar mass 6.02*10^34 G = 6.7*10^-11 h = 6.626 1 A = 1 C/s = ~ 6.24*10e18 = 62400000000000000000 electrons/second elementary charge of single electron -1.602*10e-19 C elementary charge of single proton +1.602*10e-19 C planck length 1.61619997*10e-35 m Observation " remember" I am the only one that notices this??? Why 6???? Whats so special about 6?????? You say, Mass is a measure of the "amount" of stuff. It is hard to define, except as mass. now you sound like me WHAT STUFF??????????????

I see, but then Kilogram as mass still = 1 point? I read that mass basically means all the atoms in an object, so I assume in this case kilogram = 1 or 0 = "I don't know" , not sure.... Then 1 just means that 1 of " something." This is hard to grasp, its that 1 basically it seems unavoidable to define....

I 90% agree with you, thanks for that link by the way.. Hymm 'a' is solving for arc minutes right? 1/360 of a cycle...it looks like on orbital frequency..These are inversely proportional??? My assumptions still hold..I don't think this is complex at all, its right there...F= force, but then f = frequency??? really?????? Its these things in science that is the hurdle that blocks my intellect and communication skills But I will take your advice " for now." So far all the links you given me have been incredible.. Yes, I think I am moving too fast and need to slow down... When you say: the error is the accuracy of the model method It makes me think of " human error" surly there are better ways of calculations right?? Electroweak interaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction Hymm sounds interesting, and looks " like I would be good at it." Electro Static? Conservative Forces? Plasma Fields? Strong Nuclear Forces? Worm Holes? Time Travel<------------- I HOPE?? How deep is this?????? What does it do????

What if others have seen it too??? They are healthy productive citizens. I've read extensively on this till blue in the face. Its an observation that does not agree with the standard model.

In your link here: http://www.sfu.ca/colloquium/PDC_Top/astrobiology/discovering-exoplanets/calculating-exoplanet-properties.html I see Kepler's Third Law law uses pi ratio squared, " looks like I am several centuries too late on this" however, I noticed something peculiar here: Copied and pasted information: As an example, since the Sun is about three hundred thousand times heavier than the Earth, ignoring the mass of the Earth in this calculation would introduce an error of less than 0.001%. The equation can be solved for the only remaining variable which is the orbital radius, 'a'. Or 'a' = x^2 = -1????? Um....Isn't 0.001 used as a frequency? This really now complicates things does it? I never even knew this " really " I did not, thanks for the link! Now, pi ratio " obviously squared " = close to 9.8 m/s/s, would this be referencing earth as the center of the Universe?? It looks like so... Think about it in relation to time. I know I am not the only one whom has thought of the correlation, however I am more intrigued with the statements: As an example, since the Sun is about three hundred thousand times heavier than the Earth, ignoring the mass of the Earth in this calculation would introduce an error of less than 0.001%. The equation can be solved for the only remaining variable which is the orbital radius, 'a'. Or 'a' = x^2 = -1????? Earth is measured in kilograms right? So how could " any metric" system describe "energy" within: 10^3 = kilo = Distance and grams= milla = Time?? GOSH! That is very small! Here is a link on this: Black Holes and Sub-millimeter Dimension http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9808138 We are still in space here so this inquiry should still be a valid case here. So then, wouldn't the " kilogram" have two separate systems of measure that make them both inversely proportional not to the square of the distance but to ----------------------> time! as in E=mc^2??????????? I get this logic from: As an example, since the Sun is about three hundred thousand times heavier than the Earth, ignoring the mass of the Earth in this calculation would introduce an error of less than ------> THERE--------->0.001%. The equation can be solved for the only remaining variable which is the orbital radius, 'a'. Or 'a' = x^2 = -1????? Again shouldn't that be saying this: The equation can be solved for the only remaining variable which is the orbital radius as x^2 = -1????? About 10^3 = kilo = Distance and grams= milla = Time. 1 micron = 1 000 nanometers 1 μm = 1 000 nm TT?1 micron = 1 micrometer 1 μm = 1 μm TT?1 micron = 0.001 millimeter 1 μm = 0.001 mm Link for these units is here: http://www.aqua-calc.com/what-is/length/micron a^3 is only obvious here as volume, acceleration, and time rather the speed of light squared as mass and energy equivalence.. Now wonder space is flat, not necessarily outer space but both spaces inversely..This radius must then describe the straight path of a -1 complex number relation in QM subjects. All exponent "then" are merely arc minutes*.5 = +1. I guess their is more to a static universe than we know ??? I think pi ratio does have units but not units we " recognize" as a metric but maybe static units, or something ......

I see now...Thanks. Ok, if a "Color Book" experiment "showed" that " you don't necessarily need " color crayons" to color in the contours of shapes IE flowers, animals etc, and the experiment, is physically tested and legitimate, IE black and white contours have color in them " but no crayons were used." I assume this does not agree with our standard model and " nature" in regards to visual perception? Would this mean a possible new discovery has been made in regards to the human senses, or have the human senses been misunderstood? Thats where i really get confused...How can a discovery be a discovery if something was miss understood.. I think that is something worth pointing out.. In simpler words, or maybe even a better example: If you saw this flower on a white piece of paper, just as it is in the photo below " has no color", then you printed this on paper, and held this in your hand for say about 5 seconds and saw a formation of colors "appearing on it" ie: you saw all colors for example" What would that mean?? To me it could mean some of the following: We could build holograms "in empty"? We have misunderstood " the human senses??