Recent content by ruivocanadense

Yes Octet, sorry. I don't see them taking a physics approach to forces on it. There must be a way to break it down. And say it is such force becuase such is acting on it.

And how is that exactly? can you elaborate on it?

When you study physics deeper you learn there are 4 types of atomic forces that represent all other in the atomic level (i.e. electromagnetic force, gravitational force, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force). I always try to see how they manifest in the the atomic interactions. For example...

We know classical equations fail to follow conservation of momentum and energy when we are dealing with speeds closer to the speed of light. But does it fail in the center of mass reference frame of a system?

Well yeah I didn't say to prove a definition, and I thought reciprocity implied uniqueness. On another note, can you direct me on where to find this proof, like the one you mentioned above about deviating from c*ln(x).

Without a proof of that not necessarily. All logarithms have to satisfy all logarithmic laws, but not the other way around, unless we can prove reciprocity. All bananas are big and yellow, but there are other fruits that are big and yellow and are not bananas (e.g. mango).

Sorry I don't understand the logic, can I have a few extra steps?

Where does the c from c*ln(x) come from? And how do those two prior conditions imply f(x) = c*ln(x). Sorry for my ignorance, I'm not understanding. Also when you say ln(x) do you already know it is a logarithmic function. Because if it you do, your not proving it. And if you don't, I don't...

Yes. I guess I didn't need to give all this information. The question is: Why if I satisfy the laws of logarithms does it have to be a logarithm. I mean, logarithms have to satisfy the laws of logarithms, but can't there exist something that satisfies these same properties but that is not a...

My book finds a function of x say ln(x). It is the area under 1/x. Having the properties (d/dx) ln x = 1/x and ln 1 = 0. It says it determines ln(x) completely. It satisfies the laws of logarithms, but why can I regard it as a logarithm just because it satisfies those laws?

I'm Paulo, 25 years old. I transferred into physics. Going back to my Mathematical roots =)