Recent content by rockytriton

I would never vote for a Texan or a fundamentalist christian, I will only vote for an American.

I think the first time I didn't get carded for buying beer was when I started feeling old.

Also, a true prodigy has a great amount of talent compared to a small need for practice. Take those autistic piano prodigies for example, they don't sit there at the piano for 8 hours a day practicing constantly. They just seem to have a natural ability to repeat things like music on the...

More evidence that psychology is just a psuedoscience... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070803110811.htm

According to fox news, normal children are not special, they must make themselves special, and they blame the decline of america on Mr Rogers for telling kids that they are special... See the video: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/06/fox-news-%E2%80%98blame-mr-rogers%E2%80%99/

NCSU has a bunch of video lectures for calculus I, II, and III. I found these with google a while back: http://www.math.ncsu.edu/calculus/web/videos.html

I've seen this "Einstein" puzzle before, it took me about 10 mins to figure it out, I don't think it's really hard. Especially since my mom figured it out pretty quickly as well, she just created an excel spreadsheet to figure out the logic. I've seen things saying that if you can figure...

my guess is that her parents gave her lots of access to drawing materials, gave her lots of inspiration, and gave her 0 access to TV. Add that to a little natural talent in art and boom, you have a child prodigy. I think the main factors are inspiration and no TV.

I wonder what your definition of a genius is. If it's someone who can understand higher level math and that's it, then yea I guess they weren't geniuses. Though I would consider that a math genius, not the definition of a genius in general. I would say yes they were geniuses. They were...

oh, they are vectors, but they are not part of the problem. I understand how it goes from the first integral to the second integral, I'm having a problem figuring out how it goes from the second to the third integral here. The vectors have already been used up there.

hmm, I don't know, personally I think that comparing the understanding of the theory of relativity and the understanding of calculus is like comparing apples and oranges.

I have a book that has the following integral: 6\int_\frac{-1}{2}^\frac{1}{2}\int_\frac{-1}{2}^\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{r^2}a_r\cdot a_z dx dy This integral gets converted to: 3\int_\frac{-1}{2}^\frac{1}{2}\int_\frac{-1}{2}^\frac{1}{2}\frac{dx dy}{(x^2 + y^2 + 1/4)^\frac{3}{2}} (z = 1/2...

thanks! I knew it would be something stupid that I missed. I still don't get where they got the "5 * ln(50)" from though...

Ok, there's a differential equation that is: dv/dt = 9.8 - (v/5), v(0) = 0 to represent a falling object. So the solution ends up being v = 49(1 - e^t/5) and the equilibrium solution (terminal velocity) is v = 49. Now I have a problem that says "find the time that must elapse...

I'm trying to solve a physics problem with some trig in it. I'm looking at a solution but I'm not understanding where it gets from one step to another. I understand it up to this point: 19.6m + 800m * cos(Z)^2 = 2,000m * sqr(1 - cos(Z)^2) * cos(Z) But I don't understand how they get...