Jump to content
Science Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


pzkpfw last won the day on May 3 2018

pzkpfw had the most liked content!

About pzkpfw

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. He has a history of poor reading comprehension, coupled with assuming the content of a study from the title of it. I'm betting he's seen a title like "Scientists study [ramifications of] vacuum bubbles", and just imagines that it means they've seen an actual example of one.
  2. Please provide an actual quote that shows that claim.
  3. Dot is common in algebra to denote multiplication, avoids confusion with x as a variable. i.e. E=m.c2 is equivalent to E=mc2 (Why he or she thinks it's wrong, no comment on that ...) https://www.dummies.com/education/math/algebra/recognizing-operational-symbols-in-algebra/
  4. You're missing what's relevant to the main content of this thread (and much of your incredulity about SR). Take A and B, in space somewhere - from the distance between them changing we would see they have relative motion. A can consider themselves as at rest and B moving. B can consider themselves as at rest, and A moving. But there's no absolute truth to that, there's no absolute rest. The important thing is that A and B can both do physics experiments and get the same results. Neither can "prove" they are at rest and the other moving. Now your spinning backflipper; he or she can perform
  5. Since he's spinning (the backflip), he will feel acceleration. Acceleration is absolute; he won't feel at rest. Accelerometers on his feet and head will confirm this.
  6. It doesn't matter that you call them options instead of permutations, or that a hypothetical hacker is doing the choosing. This is wrong. A choice of four things, to place in a choice of four positions makes 4 x 4 = 16 permutations, or options, or possibilities, or whatever you call them. "(4 + 4)" for this, makes no sense.
  7. ( It occurs that since different orders is what causes your system to allow repetition and get too-high a number, we need to divide by the number of orders to fix your calculation. It may seem slightly circular, but the possible orders in which the 4 numbers can be chosen is 24. So your corrected formula is: ((4 x 4) x (3 x 3) x (2 x 2) x (1 x 1)) / 24 ... which is now 24, just like the better method. )
  8. There are two problems with your method: First is you don't have a good grasp of when to multiply and when to add possibilities. e.g. your "... and you choose the first number from the group (the group which has 4 numbers to begin with) and place it in one of the four available positions within the grid (for the first few steps at the beginning that's 4 options to choose a number + 4 options to choose ..." giving your "(4+4)". You should be multiplying, not adding here. Choosing 1 of the 4 numbers, and placing it in 1 of the 4 spaces gives 16 permutations for that first step. Draw them! You'
  9. Assuming you don't consider rotational or mirror symmetry to be a copy or duplicate then 16 x 15 x 14 ... is indeed the answer. Consider placing the first number in the top left corner, you could place any of 1 to 16 there. So that's 16 choices. Whichever you placed in that first square, you now you have 15 numbers left to choose between for the next square. Keep going like that until you have 1 number left to place in the last empty square. That's where you get the 16 x 15 x 14 x 13 x ... x 2 x 1 from. And it's a large number. --- Also, again assuming rotational or
  10. CO2 is one Carbon atom with two Oxygen atoms. You get a lot of those molecules by burning stuff, Carbon in the thing being burned, gets joined with Oxygen from the air (that's simplified). CO2 does not have a tobacco smell. What there is in that room, is the CO2 plus a whole bunch of other molecules (gases, liquid droplets and particles) that came from burning the tobacco. Now someone else who goes into that room, as they breath, they will be taking in some of that CO2 - and other stuff, which is why they smell those smells. (Wikipedia page that includes a list of compounds (e.g. C18H12,
  11. You continue to misrepresent the twins' paradox. While two observers are in relative motion, for both of them, the others' clocks is slow (while for both of them their own clock is perfectly normal). They must be, for the speed of light to be invariant. (I know you don't like this - you think it's contradictory and illogical - but that's your own flawed interpretation, not standard well known science.) That reciprocal experience is what gives rise to the "paradox" in the "twins' paradox". In a scenario where A "stays home" and B zooms away from A then comes back to A, a learner can think
  12. I've been a mod a couple of times. It does get tiresome keeping up with spammers, seagulls, trolls, and others. Full respect to the mods.
  • Create New...