/sci/ - Science & Math

>like a triple integral of the volume between a plane and some kind of conic function
Yes. But that might just be the case because I understand Riemannian geometry and can therefore "see" these kind of formulas.
But I forget syntax of programming languages I seldomly use...

Isaac Newton is a good start.
Massive christ fag who wrote more papers on Christianity than on physics.

>One time Q is constant
I should at that this is an informal statement meaning dQ=0, since there is no "heat-function Q".
The enthalpy H is what comes closest to a heat function.

>>3039096
>We know our universe is expanding. In a sense, more "space" is being generated.

In the sense of my post above
>>3039101
the statement "space is expanding" is a property of the metric.
In this case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann-Lema%C3%AEtre-Robertson-Walker_metric

there should be a factor a(t) somewhere, and if time t goes by then a(t) gets bigger which means that the metric says (in the sense of my post above) that different points (points of the manifold in the set theoretic sense) are more and more far away.

Einstein predicted the expansion of the universe because he solved the equations for the metric he made up (posted above) and they told him it's a likely metric for our universe. And then it was observed. Well, good for Einstein.

>>3012219
lol@that last postfix

>>3007721
well at the beginning of the last century it surely did. ("Jew-physics")

>>2929613
what do you wanna know?
You know the definition, what are your open questions?
I mean "tell me all you know" is a bit vague.
We can chat about Lie Groups, I like em :)

>>2899708
>Maybe I was born a couple hundred years too soon.
>implying human brain functionality changes over a couple hundred years.

Anyway, so if the aim of the game really was to get just much money (i.e. there is a new 10$ in the pool every round and it gets totally lost or people share), i.e. if there is no competition at all, then you could have just explained to people that it's better if the money stays in the game and not to burn the money.
But if the game was really like this, if there was no competition, why was this game even considered to be about game theory? that makes no sense.

If on the other hand there was competition in any way - then you can't say "I was logical, I was smarter, but I lost because they where stupid". If there was competition and they came out with more money, then you played badly. Becase in such a case, if you would have played like them, then you would have made more money, and therefore this would have been the better strategy. Making more money <-> better strategy. Per definition the best strategy is the one which gets you closest to winning - and even if you don't like the strategy, even if you believe everyone was being stupid, that would still have been smarter from the logical point of view, since it would have been the winning strategy. Right?

If there really was no competition, then ignore the second part.
If you are just trolling, then you have my respect.

>>2853046
Elaborate. What role do they play here? Actually, I don't even know what happens if you apply a Dirac operator to a harmonic.
(But it's funny, my first guess is you'd get some sort of anti derivative of a function:
D^2=∆
D(DY)=D^2·Y = ∆·Y = h·Y
So DY = h·D^{-1}Y
lawl)

I'll just leave this here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopf_fibration

>>2731319
mhm, ich mag die überschneidung auch nicht, aber ich würde nicht sagen, dass es die kovariante Ableitung zwingen mehr verdient hat

Ich hab schonmal gesagt, dass ich mit Algebra wenig am Hut haben generell, aber ja.
Erfinde einen anderen namen though..
Außerdem: nix gegen mathematica! :D

@OP, before I re-figure out why/how that approach works, I could compute/check the determinant if you want..