Math Is Fun Forum

Yes, It's called termodynamics.

There is a continent under the ice, if the ice melts, it flows down into the water. Or so I've heard. I've also heard that dinosaurs lived there. Also, the ice might be thicker then the sea level etc. I don't know if that's the case.

In the same way that we stoped using freons, in the same way we should stop using carbons

http://www.mathsisfun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=5066
and
http://www.mathsisfun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2042

It was my thought that alot of these kinds of questions sticks together, and has the same sort of solution incommon, just like people comming here to find solutions to problems, oftenly needs the principles and wont find the special case unless she posts it herself, and if she does, she wants help as soon as possible. So if you want to connect her problem to a thread, mostly, the search will be more easy if there is only one thread with the problem and she will find more response then you put time in there. If you had some sort of combo mode where you could see the first post in every thread and connect them. It would be interesting since you probably would understand some of the replies explaining. And it might be fun work, unless ofcourse it would be totally boring.
Could understand how it would. But I've had my say in this. Thank you!

Would it be simpler for you if I wrote C --> E, E = C-a?

How to combine multiple topics with same problem, any thoughts? Making combo threads might be interesting.

If for instance the moderator had a "combo choice" mode in which he selected 2 threads and pressed a "combine" button. The author would then become a 2 value matrix just as I explained in my post in introduction here: http://www.mathsisfun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=5362

But I don't know if it's needed.

Well, it's true isn't it? First C and then C-a does mean C-->C-a. even though the leap is a and even if a has an identity. Somehow, I imagine it works. But anyway, if you have a better way, just tell me. I'd be happy to change some. I'm thinking of this nD world. It's a dot with under(n)-dimensional dots that smear together seen from that dimension. As a (big) nD dot. So that's how all particles can have the same identity, simply say they (the particles) were you all the time, connected by gravity for instance, and if so, that q(neurons,mass,charge,distance,position,time) is actually a matrix q(particles,mass,charge,distance,position,time) that connects all thing, just a teenyweeny bit, and that truelly, the conclusion that the force does the self, is self sustaining since all mass effects eachother with a force.

"f(ns) has only incommon with f(xs) the force that keeps the self together, the force that binds it, any other function f(ns) would not be f(xs)." And since the force keep all things connected, the mass does not need an identity since they are all part of the same self, even though the self cannot notice or comprehend in particular that we are interconnected even though we are by force and hence physically and that's the only cind of interconnection there is. So given that it is the force that binds us that makes us ourself and anything itself since proven force is the function "self" and not for instance position since it is not incommon for all parts of the self, and momentum would not change the fact, since it would need to be an incommon factor and if the self would have that, then everything would have that. But that would be impossible since they would probably need to share vector 2

I guess I make little sense to you. Have you read it all yet? I guess you think I'm just a "crackpot" kind of guy. But you know, I've thought about this for a long time. Probably some (if not to say most of it) make sense. If you know how I use the math "tools".

You've been like a good friend, debating this here. Thank you so far.
(Note: that's a friendship kiss, well a smack on the sheek really)

And I hope you slept well, i guess you went to bed soon after you posted that. I know I did, gmt+1

Anyway, 184 views, Awesome! That's about as many views as i got on the other forum on 1 + 1/2 month!
On my best thread!
I must have posted something something -DOH- . Hehe.

a and b are single neurons, D is a function/matrix that loose its matrix value if C would sease to exist (vaporise, dissapearing without leaving a trace), It is probable that it is a multiple to the self, this allready explained i won't venture further here. Hence D is a matrix that requires C. Sorry for taking time, I pressed ctrl-z. Anywho, where were I?

The matrix value, is at any given time the current matrix D(xs)

Where exactly is the shortcut in this, can you tell me?

Oh, no i missed startrek, the world is comming to an end!
(Kidding)

I guess we are all just an n:dimensional solution.

thank you Ricky, for telling me and if you still consider me wrong after the edit, then just say so. In an additional reply.

*Further edits have been made*

You liked the proof, simron? Thank you!

And Ricky, are you Richard as in "Richard's paradox" in wikipedia? Myself I've never heard of it, but it did make sence. What is the paradox really reffering to? What is metaphysics and what's it got to do with what?

Overall, e^(ln(x)+1)=e^(ln(x) + 0)*e^n(0+1). the 0 can also be dealt with as the 1, in fact any additive number n in the exponent means an added multiple q^n

As you can see, when this is given, all equations that means e^(ln(x)+1)/x is e.

Sure you can. Even though I've tried myself but it didn't work. It might do now though.

You want number of sundays as a function of days?
sundayless days in first seven days = q (q(max) = 6)
days in a year = days
1+ (days-(q+1))/7

This is a matrix (a mathematical matrix, that is). If (days-(q+1))/7 ≥ 52, then you have 53 sundays

for days = 365, the chance is 1/7*100%
for days = 366, the chance is 2/7*100%
the chance for days to be 366 is 1/4
the chance for days to be 365 is 3/4
(1/4*2/7 + 3/4*1/7)*100 = 17,857% (=1/5.6 or 5/28)