DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
You wouldn't.
c ~ 1/a is a continuum, infinitely long, so "at" doesn't make sense.
You could say when.
Is this real maths or somebody winding me up?
- Thread starter amber
- Start date
c ~ 1/a is a continuum, infinitely long, so "at" doesn't make sense.
You could say when.
I am trying to explain a burst of energy/flash of light , I would of thought the energy/light would travel at c ?
Appear then in a split second vanish at c.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
You've got the cart before the horse.
Don't try to do it with math if you haven't learned the math.
Why try to explain something that is already well-understood?
If you are interested in physics, why not learn about physics?
Until you understand established physics, you're not ready to have your own ideas.
Well if I can learn the math for this particular matrix, then I may be able learn lots more. I understand I get to the end without a beginning or a middle and you are correct , I need to learn more. Every time I get an answer, I learn more. I have learnt quite a bit in the last few days, as with my example you can see I am learning. I even understand , in example : [-2,4] they are coordinates .
Two to the left and Four up .
added- In another example
let u=[0,0,0] and let v=[0,0,0]
I know I am explaining dead centre.
would z need to be +5?
[o,o,+5]?
How big is the box ? 0-10?
Sorry , just worked it out, the X,Y lines are already in the middle of Z to allow -Z direction?
so [0,0,0] would be centralised?
Last edited:
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
No, Theorist, it would be worse than teaching chemistry to river. (I tried it once.)
This theorist you keep mentioning does not exist. Please help me learn some of this particular math.
What would dead centre be then using a Matrix coordinate system?
And is this calculus?
You cannot jump into matrix math without any knowledge to build from and hope to understand what is going on.
There is no such thing as a matrix coordinate system.
If your matrix is describing a Cartesian coordinate system then (0,0,0) is the origin.
Thank you very much origin, you will not regret learning me.
What do ''we'' mean by Cartesian?
Would Cartesian be our present use or classical use?
Let's cut to the chase then, are you the same person as theorist-constant12345
Oh for crying out loud, NO.
I doubt that...
You don't learn someone, you teach someone.
Look up Cartesian coordinate on google, it is very clear.
Am I the same person as a character , a performance artist, an alias on a forum?
No I am not this person.
Thank you for answering my question about Calculus.
A Cartesian coordinate system is a coordinate systemthat specifies each point uniquely in a plane by a pair of numerical coordinates, which are the signed distances to the point from two fixed perpendicular directed lines, measured in the same unit of length.
I do have the links open also, I am not being lazy. I just like to hear it explained several different ways so I am sure that I understand.
It is basically a grid reference?
To clarify my understanding, if we used a Cartesian coordinate system and defined the matrix to be a 8*8*8 , we could have a really good game of 3d chess? Using the system to make our moves of the pieces.I think you have a bottomless well whatifer
I don't do mathematics in any size / shape / form and the closest I have come to Cartesian is reading the odd headline about Kardashian
But I'm guessing they are not the same
Last edited:
Lol, thank you for replying. I think the Cartesian coordinate system is easy enough to understand, it is basically just different points inside of a box. It seemingly gives the dead centre of the box a 0 position value (the observer) , then minus and plus vector values ''expand'' from this point.I don't do mathematics in any size / shape / form and the closest I have come to Cartesian is reading the odd headline about Kardashian
But imI guessing they are not the same
I am yet to understand how this works though, if the box is in motion.