/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3256885
as I pointed out, the problem is the way you speak about it. You ask "why did the big bang happen?" but you should try to view spacetime as a whole - all times/states in which the spatial part of the universe was, is or will be. it's one big 4-dimesnional area (manifold) and the big bang is just one end of it. (but which doesn't answer the philosophical question "'why is there something rather than nothing?'" - google this question)
get it?
then, the real question to be ask is why time seems to have some sort of direction: "Arrow of time".

>>3168207
bumpin a troll thead:
\pi/10

>So it would fail if the pattern was something like
>1,2,4,9,20,43,86,175
>[start at 1, add the prime >= the current value]
>add the prime

explain this pattern.
how do you even get to the number 2 and where did you use the prime 3?

I also use Mathematica, it's faster than handwriting and LaTeX. However, many people don't want to get used to it, it's not for everyone.

to write a little t for temperature is a shame.
Anyway, you're right, this insight can maky one say. And everything in phisics is just a model. The classical Hamiltonial

E=H=m(v^2)/2=(p^2)/2

is just the second order term of the relativistic expansion. Hence Schrödinger equation i∂_t \Psi = c ∆ \Psi is just an approximation. Since every field seems like it wants to be quantized, even the Maxwell equations don't hold. Sad really, since classical Yang Mills theory is beautiful. You have to trade Noeter theorems for stupid Ward identities.
And it doesn't end there. When you quantize gravity you don't even have some smooth metric, you have a bunch of em or you have discrete gravitons.
Probably spacetime isn't even smooth, see non-commutative geometric, and NC QFTs. And maybe there are not even particles, but strings.

Physics != Math, there is no truth, only beautiful ideas.

PV=NkT is one of them. (the Energy U is cT, i.e. doesn't depent on V, freaky)

>>2731185
ein thread über stokes theorem
muss ja ein gefundenes fressen für dich sein :D
Und, irgendwelche ideen was die conditions in dem fall angeht

und das \del wird wohl ein konventioneller "grad" sein

Nice one!

Here is my answer to you OP:

ContourPlot3D[(x^2 + (3/2)^2 y^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 -
x^2 z^3 - (3/2)^2/20 y^2 z^3 == 0, {x, -1.5, 1.5}, {y, -1,
1}, {z, -1, 1.5}, Boxed -> False, ContourStyle -> Red, Axes -> None,
PlotRange -> All, ViewPoint -> {1, 1, .2}, Mesh -> None,
BoxRatios -> {1, .5, 1}]

>>2719670
okay yes, if you count in experimentalists, then this is obviously true.

you keep killing me dude.
you just have to insert Q and P into the tangent line equation

>>2695590
I have not found the value for a, 1.3 was an example.
The point in your pic ia (a,2/sqrt(a)) is a generic point and you have to find your answers in terms of a.
There is no value for a.

Since Q and P lie on the axes, one of the values is 0.
The other value is fixed by the requirement that the line crosses the axis (since the line is given in verms of a, the crossing point will also be given in terms of a)