/sci/ - Science & Math

Forgetting how it will affect the gravity well for starters. (even without the simple "let's make everything equidistant" scenario)

If say, we did the slow down method to drop from one planet to the next, would we survive the trip, being outside each planet's safety net?

Heat is the least of your worries.

Less distant future, imho. Simplify things and build a system that can speed up/slow down the planet rotation so that we can push it to where we want it to easier, and use the rotation to help move it along. (if we are still using the push-method of space travel still.)

Do arduino and the S2 both have SD slots? If so, you might be able to run/hack both slots so that they can be linked up via a cross-over cable. Re-write some of the code if possible for the slot so that you can read/write at the same time, or run a cycle transfer that auto-switches between in/out for data flow...

If not... build a wifi dongle for the slot on an arduino, if they don't have them. (or even the micro-usb connector.)

Do the cycles require n1 and n2 for completion, or can you simply use either n1 or n2 to create an empty bucket?

Question 2: What number provides a bucket A with more then 2 tokens?

Depends on how you want to start looking at the system we have. Given Quadrants we get both relationships to Dante's Inferno and a Florentine.

Alberti cipher and Leon Battista Alberti. Painting by Alberti, book one, and the polyalphabetic disk might provide the basis.

Running an Arc from the top corner would put it at less then 430 mm, ergo it is not 920 mm.

115mm? If I recall correctly. It went 430mm-147.5 = 282.5

430squared - 282.5 squared = 115 squared.

Build a square of 430mm lengths. Then work it. your point P for a half triangle works out to 230mm, which in turn allows you to define the angle at the 147.5 position of the original form. From there, it's just funky boring math stuff.

Scribbles that somehow superimpose structure from varying levels of consistency and coherence.

I was gonna go with scribbling symbols that other people somehow know and agree with, but then decided that it wasn't correct enough....

Discrete quantum loop theory tried using it at one time.... haven't heard from it in a while. That uhm... Tau? system however got spotlight, and that was that.

2 systems:

1. coins on the table are 12 stacks in total.

2. The stacking specifics designate the edge of the table as the balance position. More coins are piled up at the weakest point in the structure.

Coin stack acts like a single object, and then the point of equilibrium is shifted slightly in favor of the table side. Yay for non-quantum fluxes that would let the coin stack fall through the table. ^_^ (damm, can't remember that nifty experiment system....)

If I recall correctly, there was an argument concerning our definition of mathematics from the one, few, many derivative of our counting system.

The creation of specifics in this case show a kind of independence for our lines which would also indicate a higher complexity of the counting system.

The cross can be gained from having "one" (more then one, or "not one"), whereas the other two require the few and many categories to derive.

Just call it self-referential, call it just.

>>5945087

English is a funny language....

Oh, and I can do it in less then one as well. Good thing toothpicks break.

If we wanted to, we could still keep the cross going by simply making the center hole smaller.

That is not a square....

One. Put toothpick vertically, along the E. ^_^ Double the points.

If we could suspend specific atomic structures within the fields such that they would realign specific field effects / elements only, then we could drastically reduce the threshold for stability. Otherwise, Need stronger and stronger fields for containment.

Missing half the required failsafes? Excluding the degradation values, and assuming the sodium doesn't itself become radioactive or decay in effectiveness, the transfer from the core is a completely closed system with neither backups or countermeasures to prevent overheating outside of not generating more heat.

If/when the sodium discharge exceeds the base value for which it is capable of transferring, the rods have to remain "hot" until the sodium itself cools down.

Furthermore, the max threshold of the sodium transfer will likely far exceed the maximum value for which the "slow burn" fudges up when the emergency strikes. If 40% of the safety rods fail, then the sodium heat exchange will be too great when you need to lower the temp. As all the mechanical aspects of the safety system will be inside the temperature heat zone, their expansion would further reduce the likelihood of a successful release.

More that it's very difficult. The fans being used would make it difficult to balance. Like balancing a jug carton on a corner, or using a blow dryer to hold a ping ball afloat.

Given the dark shade in the plane, it looks like they also balanced the plane as well. As the momentum is the air instead of the plane, this allows the plane to act as a pivot joint, and basically self-adjusts to the position of least resistance. Treat the plane as a static armature, and the air as the object force is acting on.

It's still all a form of "trig", except that you occasionally need to rotate your arcs to derive your angles, just so that you know which triangle you are working with. It's just a claim that allows you to know where you put things, relative to your co-ordinate system that is "going to never ever change."

In order to really answer the relationship, you need the degree in rotation. So, if for number 2, you rotated it along the axis 45 degrees, you can then figure out the ratio of the distance.

Most of the time, when they introduce this, they use the base distance D from the original value. So for the setup, if p1:p2 has a distance of "10", then the rotation will still fall on specific arcs when the 3rd plane = 0.

When you get to changing 2 planes, you derive two sets of values, and calculate such that each plane can still provide a x:y:0 value. It's like the more advanced algebra where you have 2 unknown variables that you want to find the specific answer to.

Or you could simply be smart and claim that because you are moving the plane itself that the two dots reside on, the distance between p1 and p2 will always be the same vector distance. When they actually go about and teach it correctly, then you start to learn about propulsion mechanics in 3 dimensions and the like. (and you get 3 co-ordinate systems to work with.)

Ie. if you a cup with a 3 cm diameter opening, turning it sideways will not somehow make the cup have a smaller top.

When you say "us"... do you mean "us" you, or "us" me?

(and when I say "me", I mean real scientists, and not me, me.)

*yawn*

Don't need "power" to hold the suit up, if done right. Hand/wrist articulation would be the most difficult. After that it would be the bracing affects around the shoulders for sharpnel. Given the total movement "needed" for shoulders, the biggest problem during explosions will be to not have the arms come off. Then it would be the legs at the hips, followed closely by the head.

The rest of it... kind of difficult. You would want an auto-asist system for sure, but most of those would be insufficient to prevent damage of the wearer. (based on the info I've read. Haven't looked into fluid dynamics in a couple years.)

Uhmm... 150$ to go to university. It's sad when you live in a small community. That was probably the 2nd highest haul out of the graduating class. Highest was 120k+ after all was said and done, though admittedly she really did have alot of academic brain-smarts.

Everything else is mostly not worth mentioning. My hobbies are too eclectic, so I've never really finished anything yet.

Electronic stabilization might work for certain subsets of specific elements only.

The problem with this system is that it over-simplifies the sum relations that make up a stable position for which an electron can be held within an atom. As such, you can't balance an electron this way.

The summary of joining one atom to the other is partially correct. (sort of. super complicated.) I'll skip the 5th level since there's just too much math, and drop it down to the second level. At the second level, you have 16 or 32 points which provide half the stabilization parameters. I'm pretty sure it was 32, though it's been a while since I worked it out.

What happens is at the second level, you have 4 perfect stability systems, 8 partial stability systems and then the rest are pretty much useless. Out of the 4 stable systems, your choice of electron position for level 1 will only have 1 possible outcome, with 2 unstable positions and the 4th simply can't get there.

Joining atoms at the same level can only happen under very specific relationships. Electron at 2p5.1 for instance will not join up at the electron position from atom 2, but rather at one of the non-linked half sets that don't make up a stable orbit within the atom itself, the which has the most partial sections. (With a slight tweak, you can derive part of said system from crystallization and seeding.)

Spins, and arcs can also play a role. (see some of the nifty patterns electrons can be forced into.)

ie It's a good attempt, but would not work.

3 big macs a day is routine, I tell you.

Well, more honestly, I take supplements as an actual supplement. As I don't have a good paying job, my base food sources change a bit on a weekly basis. As such, I occasionally grab the vitamin base iIm missing when the sales provide a horrid spectrum.

Low grain, sometimes too high protein diet. Mostly veggies, until I go and splurge of course. ^_^ Sadly, i'm one of those people that are excellent at putting on weight and keeping it.

I can't account for the growth from the bone, but the last bit of science review I read concerning the subject stated that teeth have different tolerances to the acidity of our saliva or some such. It essentially eats away at certain parts of the enamel/tooth at different speeds, and also accounts for our unique molars.

I've always hated the explanation for this, from a Set standpoint. Mathematically, your "probabilities" end up being "absolute value" probabilities, to borrow a maths term.

When you proposition from N =n,n1,n2, each door has a specific whole value of a whose n-prime value for existence dictates that the other 2 n values cannot be apart of the Set n1-prime (when n-prime properties are not derived from n-element properties.)

What happens when you provide all values for a Whole (big N), you end up with a proposition for a n-prime which is actually n-prime+nx for both doors, but unfortunately ends up with a seed value from our choice selection.

This then calculates that you have more elements n for the Set N within a particular n-prime value. Ie. the door you didn't choose.

(never bothered working this out for more then 3 doors.)