Recent content by Maxos

Definition of upper bound: Given an ordered set X and A \subset X , s \in X is its "upper bound" ( sup\{A\}) \leftrightharpoons \forall x \in A, x \preceq s et \forall y \prec s \exists a \in A : a \prec y

There was another identical thread posted some weaks ago, but I cannot find it. Yes, this is because processes happen all the time with continuity.

Baggio... Roberto Baggio?

What on Earth is this index, you have always on your mouth? Anyway, I do not care. Physics cannot be explained within other subjects, else this subject would be Philosophy, which has no longer means to understand Physics. You know, God is dead.

Well, a "limit point" (I cannot find the precise meaning of the phrase) has to be an accumulation point for the domain, then...

Observables are described with self-adjoint (I don't know the right english word, but I mean L=L*) hendomorphisms of an infinite-dimensioned complex space, and the possible values are their eigenvalues. Pure states of a QM-system are vectors of the space whose norm is = 1.

Well, a linear system, rank of the reduced associated matrix is 2 and so is that of the complete one. 2 eq. 3 variables, rank1 = rank2, then \exists \infty^1 solutions bring the terms in c (or one of the other, it's the same) to the second member and solve the system in m and w. Ok...

During the world championships, in Helsinki? Fiat rain!

Well, that's what mom said.

Some missing points: Physics is the sole foundation of modern science. Nothing can be autonomous from Physics.

Are you really referring to ax^2+bx+c=0 ??

http://wolfgang.altervista.org/Immagine.gif Me, yesterday, thinking of Future.

Ok, quite an usual occurrence!

May I ask, How come? We are not talking about language at all! We are talking about a definition of Physics, your "democracy" is completely useless.

So, good shipwreck.