I don't see why the assumption that the things you will do in the future being real events in spacetime, eliminates your interaction, I guess.
I don't see why the assumption that the things you will do in the future being real events in spacetime, eliminates your interaction, I guess.
Emily: Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Stage Manager: No. *pauses* The physicists and mathematicians, maybe they do some.
One foot on a track does not allow a 3rd track.Originally Posted by profpat
Time independence: [∂E(g)]˛=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c˛
This could impy that H+ and H- symmetry are spontaneously broken meaning certain directions are preferred more than another.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]˛=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c˛
According to the law of probability the distribution tends toward the normal.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]˛=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c˛
Thats true Antonio, the key word is tends. I'm sure you don't believe that after flipping a coin billion of times that there will be an equal amount of heads and tails, though that is a possibility. Highly unlikely. I believe the latest estimate is that for every 1,000,000,000 particles of antimatter there is 1,000,000,001 particles of matter. Yes it does tend towards normal.
Best,
Pat
P.S I think this is valid evidence that the universe TENDS towards symmetry. Which is a good thing, because if we had ABSOLUTE symmetry we wouldn't be here having our enjoyable discussions.
In standard normal continuous distibution the expected mean is always zero. See http://mathworld.wolfram.com/NormalDistribution.html
Time independence: [∂E(g)]˛=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c˛
Actually it is evidence it tends to reduce symmetries.
Though I still argue that there are a lot of anti-quarks locked up in the form of dark matter. :P
Emily: Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Stage Manager: No. *pauses* The physicists and mathematicians, maybe they do some.
However, arguments not supportable by experiments are simply vacuous predictions. On the other hand, the existence of spacetime quanta can be supported by the experimental truth of a successful cold fusion reaction.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]˛=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c˛
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)