Recent content by maverickmathematics

Whozum - in the first equation, it is C of v as you wrote but in the second equation, it is C of rho times v So logarithms cannot be used can't they? Regards, M

Please Help!

Hey guys, I'm trying to convert this equation into terms of y Q = C (of v) ^n Q = C (of rho.v) ^ y v is the veloctiy and rho v is the flow of a material although that doesn't really matter. C is a contant, and rho is equal to 1.42. When i write of v - i mean if writing it out on paper...

With a Zero Knowledge Proof you do tell one person about your idea and they check it and then just tell people effectivly that you are right. They do not tell people what you are right about precisely, for example you show the leading engineer in America your owk under a Zero Knowledge Proof, he...

For the Helium adn hydrogen thing, they may been what if you combine the 3 protons and 3 neutrons to give the 3rd element of the periodict table.

Hi - my definition would most likely be wrong so here you go from a website that I now like! http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Zero-knowledge_proof A zero-knowledge proof is an interactive method for one party to prove to another that a (usually mathematical) statement is true, without...

In the UK calculus used to be taught at 15-16, this is a while ago now - probably when the GCSE was still an O-level, now it is taught @ 17-18. I believe that the single greatest hurdle in the teaching of calculus is the symbols - it can appear to be a different language that is only...

Hi, Nice to see Ben is being as helpful and as well accepted as ever! Well OP - if you want to get verification of your idea use a zero knowledge proof. It is the best way in my eyes as it protects your 'secrets'. I'm sure our lawyer can verify me on this. Regards, M

I just wrote a really long and funny post but it really didnt express what i wanted to - what I really want to say is - yes maths is built on axioms that cannot be proven without the use of other axioms and so the entire syste, is underpinned by a created basis. The original poster sid that...

We do not rememebr the future as we only experience the flwo of time in one direction - it is the same reason why we do not see broken tea cups fixing themselves and leaping up back on to tables.

The past is in the future and the future is in the past

Hey, This is probably nothing but interestingly the spaces between the numbers are all prime, 107, 79, 73, 193, 137.

You cannot have inf - 1

And now everybody goes quiet when they can't take the michael out of us - nice post Ben and let's just kick it ! -M

Or are we talking about the axioms Mathematics is based on (typically Peano's)? And the limits this places on mathematics? -M