Jun
22
comment Intuitively, why does putting capacitors in series decrease the equivalent capacitance?
What about 3 caps, seems that would only effect the two outer?
Jun
22
comment Intuitively, why does putting capacitors in series decrease the equivalent capacitance?
Maybe I should say charge carriers, that mediate the field.
Jun
22
answered Intuitively, why does putting capacitors in series decrease the equivalent capacitance?
Jun
20
comment Is there a maximum distance from a planet that a moon can orbit?
That all seems like a matter definitions and choices what is a moon and planet etc. If you don't care about technicalities and astronomical vocabulary exactness (like is Pluto a planet) really you just have to look at the constraints necessary to get definitive answers. Like say given a velocity, masses, then it is determined if it is a stable orbit, hyperbole (escape velocity) or parabolic trajectory. Or basically different eccentricity cases, which there are three possibilities for any body in question.
Feb
18
comment Why do electromagnetic waves have the magnetic and electric field intensities in the same phase?
But from an abstract math perspective, chaos, infinitely complicated systems i guess are more interesting. Maybe they all know and don't say, that we need to be able to handle insanely complex, large systems and discover abstract principles which emerge at large scales, to get ahead of the curve.
Feb
18
comment Why do electromagnetic waves have the magnetic and electric field intensities in the same phase?
And here we are today, no further really have we progressed it seems. Further it is maybe just as interesting to ask why nobody considers this? Perhaps for the pure sport of it alone, why nobody has framed wiled hypothesis as to the mechanisms underlying fields?
Feb
18
comment Why do electromagnetic waves have the magnetic and electric field intensities in the same phase?
Lower level physical theories can describe why, but I don't think any where put forth outside if either theories because at the time of Maxwell the atom hadn't yet been proven or shown necessary. Gravitation and any field theories had this problem. I think in general everyone supposed the mechanisms describing these fields, happen on scales far to small, and for all they knew possibly fundamental to reality. Then quantum came along and were all taught to not try and describe these mechanisms. Simply by the words of Feynman that it is impossible to understand.
Feb
2
comment Why aren't the 0's significant figures in 0.002?
Okay so ideally, the measurement is say an integer number of atoms or quarts or so.ething or other, giving length, or maybe a real number, and it have endless string of fractional part. We know the given measurements value is correct up to a certain point. We need to consider how values computed from it and arithmetic, are correct compared to what the idealized value would be. It seems this can be considerably complicated and depends on the operations we perform and logic. There might not be a ready catch all method for dealing with this. And sig figs is one such method.
Feb
1
comment Why aren't the 0's significant figures in 0.002?
So basically an ad hoc method of rounding.
Jan
5
awarded  Student
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
Maybe how we discover such subtle abstract things. That said its interesting about the space shuttle, I love space shuttle trivia from ome 1 not necessary to it being one of the most complicated devices made by humans. Thanks.
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
I'm not a phd or professional of orbital mechanics, so I wasn't sure, or if I'm just wrong. That said if is a bug, I do understand how this can happen. We both realized a very similar issue that comes up with trigonometric functions in applied math, an error of 180 degrees and multiples of it. I was quite aware of this, and did put extra effort to avoid, and yet on January 3, there it is. It shows just how difficult bugs are to avoid. But I understand we aren't computers. Our ability to make mistakes are a virtue. Even this is perhaps a example of some querky symmetry group.
Jan
3
revised What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
added 242 characters in body
Jan
3
answered What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
I guess the question is basically when was earths 2019 perhelion? We either are just short of it or just passed it, then wolfram is off by positive or negative 180 degrees?
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
But the real question is the value of true anomaly. I've asked on astronomy also. I really think it's value is erroneous.
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
This was just through the wolfram alpha website. My code was in client js and I'm not really familiar with mayhematica or how wolfram arrives at that result. But I could see that perhaps it could be really an issue with mathematica.
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
But it should be answerable here. If true anomaly is angle from earth to perhelion side of major axis of orbits ellipse, then I'm correct in that earth passes through 0 degrees at roughly January 3. I remember also wolfram reported correctly 180 around august, earth aphelion. So wolfram appears to be in error as well haha.
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
I dont know how to easily move question?
Jan
3
comment What is Earth's current true anomaly from j2000?
It probably may be a good or better place, they probably use it to determine exact position of stars for viewing.