Recent content by meaw

>> Based on that assumption, isn't the speed of light defying the laws of relativity? Everything is relative BUT the speed of light Wrong statement - "Everything is relative". The real thing is 1. All laws of nature are absolute - they are not relative to the speed of the observer. 2...

uman, do you know calculus. to be precise Newton's summation formula? here it is for you. summation of n/(C + n) where n varies from 0 to Inf is same as Definite integral of 1 / ( 1 + C.x) from 0 to 1 = 1/C * ln (1+x) use this formula after you decompose the function into smaller units...

how can you ever integrate a function without knowing it form? what if f (x+1/x) = x; it becomes ln(x) dx which is divergent as x-> inf. unless you know the alzebraic form you can;t even tell if the function is even defined in the interval, let aside integrating it. and the by parts integration...

Emily, Let me elaborate what arildno said. Suppose you are tracking the distance at various time interval of a moving car from you. The distance of the car from you varies as the following formula X = 5t , where t is time in stopwatch. Now if you ask what is the velocity of the car...

>> The interval of convergence for ln (1+x)'s series is (0,1]. I thought the interval is (-1,1], open on -1, closed on +1

right you are. I am wondering whether any attempts have been made to redefine calculus for discountinouous functions where the discontinuity is of the order of plank's constant which can be ignored for general physics but not so for quantum mech.

agreed. a more elegant answer is here :) ln(2) = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 -1/4 + 1/5 - 1/6 ... +- 1/2n where n -> inf = (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + + ... 1/2n where n -> inf - 2 . ( 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/6 + ... this has only n terms ) = (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + ... 1/2n) - (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... +...

you are partially right. you are right n the sense that (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 ...) is divergent. but you are worng in the sense that you only considered that portion of the sum, the whole thing together is not divergent. (x + x) - 2x : is convergent even if (x+x) is divergent :)

"No mathematical model can be expected to work perfectly" - you mean it really ? Then why are we so bothered about mathematical inconsistencies when GR and QM are put together ? Unless you are hiniting at thephylosophical question of whether maths is invented or discovered, the general believe...

Tell me what is wrong with this :) ln (2) = ln( 1 +1 ) and the power series expansion of ln(1+x) for x=1 gives ln(2) = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 -1/4 + 1/5 + ... = (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + ... ) - 2 . ( 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/6 + .....) = (1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + ... )...

"maybe break it up into f (x) = x +2 and g (x) = x - 2, find the derivatives of f(x) and g(x) using the definition, then solve f '(x) / g '(x)? " the right formula in this case will be f'(x).g(x) - f(x).g'(x) / g'(x) ^ 2. for the example with x^2 = X^3 / X , it will be 3x^2. x -...

i wondered at the idea that calculus works for continuous functions and in reality fundamental quantities are discontinuous. For example energy or an electron can't asume all values. Therefore isn't there a conflict when we work on a equation like dE/dt or something similar which involve...

It would be a bend that bends on itself and nothing spills out of it (Except that backholes to radiate - Hawkin's radiation)

Dear Sten, There is no 'proof' or mathematical explanation for this, afa I know. There are many expalanations given but all of them lead to more questions. The origin of 'mass' itself is not known unless Higgs boson is proven to exists. Let me explain the way I understand this. According to...

Folks, some of this postulates about nature, can't be explained with maths. Einstein was asked, what he things about mass. He thoughts they are kinks in spacetime, concentrated spacetime lumps. Better explanation can be given by Higg's boson althought the latter is yet to be verified...