Recent content by hutchphd

Although I slighted @Gavran by not mentioning his attempt, I don't think anyone had called out Ptolemy's Theorem by name. How often do you get to cite Ptolemy directly?? Who wouldn't want to add that in.... lotsa fun....and pedagogically an impressive theorem IMHO.

Yes indeed. Through laziness I did not really look at the attempt.......bad form on my part (apologies!)

Please feel free. I have had an exhausting week and seem disinclined to do anything (feeling each of my 73 yrs I guess.....ah, well. I wish LaTeX was not such a chore for me)

There is also a lovely theorem by Ptolemy that deals with cyclic quadrilaterals. I think that will work......not an intuitive result! Will write it up if time/energy permits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy%27s_theorem

I think it unlikely that any known hull material could have contained the colossal ego of Stockton Rush, a walking rebuttal to the aphorism that a man's reach should always exceed his grasp.

The neutral current path offers a very low resistance path for the current, and so most of the power follows this path. The local neutral ground is important to ensure that no large potential differences can accrue over time (i.e. the V=0 point remains good). The electrical resistence of...

Absolutely. Those sirens need to be quieter. They are really annoying.

And larger conic tornadoes often furcate into a Devil's dance of tornadoes at the tip. Whenever the sirens go off I have a movie of those in my head. I am not sure that all the spawn co-rotate but my guess is yes. Perhaps I can find an example.

I would think that any afficionado of mathematics would be fascinated by the questions represented by Bertrand Russell and his Paradox. Does this not require some sure knowledge of groups and their foibles? (I am not a mathematics person)

I think you likely need to be more carefull in your definition of "absorbance". One cannot necessarilly conflate "scattering" with "absorbance". I do not know what your particular calculations provide.

I disagree. A much easier, cheaper, and more accessable model is the discharge of a capacitor. Volts is easier to measure than REM, and the invocation of something as exotic as radioactivity to this bedrock notion is counterproductive. Other examples abound.

I am pleased that the interaction was useful for you. It is the most one can expect! Good luck.

That is my first encounter with this term. I will endeavor to use it daily.

There are a host of atomic behaviors that do not comport with classical mechanics. This was seen to be a problem at the time, and most of them were illuminated by quantum mechanics, although for some the solution seemed as daunting as the problem.

If this really bothers you, may I suggest that you take up a more idiosyncratic pursuit. Perhaps painting or sculpture. Each work product has value because of its uniqueness: it will be redolent with individuality not easilly matched by artificial art (unless perhaps you somehow emulate Bob...