Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The Soc for People of 'GRDCT2008' Mk VI Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    :cry: I'm cold and non-dry & its made me illl.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GHOSH-5)
    :yep:
    I have another question for you :woo:

    There are 4 graphs

    a)  y = 4/x b)  y = 3^x c)  y = 12x - x^3 d)  y= 6/x-1

    Write down the letters corresponding to the three curves which cut the y-axis.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by natty_d)
    I have another question for you :woo:

    There are 4 graphs

    a)  y = 4/x b)  y = 3^x c)  y = 12x - x^3 d)  y= 6/x-1

    Write down the letters corresponding to the three curves which cut the y-axis.
    Do you not even have an idea?

    Let y = f(x). A curve cuts the y-axis at x = 0. So a graph cuts the y-axis if f(0) is a real number. Test f(0) for each of your curves.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GHOSH-5)
    Do you not even have an idea?

    Let y = f(x). A curve cuts the y-axis at x = 0. So a graph cuts the y-axis if f(0) is a real number. Test f(0) for each of your curves.
    I see it now. :facepalm: :p:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    ....:sigh:
    might try and catch up with core3 tomorrow :sad:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Chemistry > Maths
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    but I like maths....!!
    (I like chemistry too)
    not spectroscopy though...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by raceforthefishman)
    but I like maths....!!
    (I like chemistry too)

    not spectroscopy though...
    Physical Chem
    [-\frac{\hbar}{2m}\cdot\frac{d^2}{  dx^2} + U(x)]\psi(x)=E\psi(x)

    \forall \exists \psi_n_l_m(\phi,\theta,r)

    and the like.



    Spectroscopy is awesssssssssssssssomeeeeeeeeee
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    :adore: Schrodinger

     i \hbar \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi (\vec{r}, t) = \hat{H} \Psi (\vec{r}, t)

    :adore: Maxwell-Boltzmann

     \dfrac{N_i}{N} = \dfrac{g_i e^{-E_i /kT}}{\displaystyle\sum_j g_j e^{-E_j /kT}}
    Offline

    16
    I really really ought to get some work done before I go back...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GHOSH-5)
    :adore: Schrodinger

     i \hbar \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi (\vec{r}, t) = \hat{H} \Psi (\vec{r}, t)
    I thought that might get you exited :p:.

    I had a good one the other day considering allowed wavefunctions in 7 membered non-benzenoid aromatic rings considering a 'particle in a ring' approximation.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Locke)
    I thought that might get you exited :p:.

    I had a good one the other day considering allowed wavefunctions in 7 membered non-benzenoid aromatic rings considering a 'particle in a ring' approximation.
    :awesome:

    Sounds awesome. I glanced at the sentence and was hoping on re-read for the neekiest pun ever, but it wasn't there (from what I saw) :tongue:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    physical.....oh dear...hell no!


    Biochemistry :proud:
    (orga is where its at baby!)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    OK, although this last one is physics, it's too awesome, and is one of the only linear systems involving three-body problems, so is of some interest to budding physicists.

    Taking the force of attraction between two objects of masses m_1 and m_2 a distance r apart to be  \gamma m_1m_2/r^2 , we can place three identical particles of equal mass m at the corners of an equilateral triangle in space of side length a such that each particle revolves around the centre of mass of the system with an angular velocity of  (3\gamma m/a^3 )^{\frac{1}{2}}
    Neeky Physics Banter
    Why don't physicists like threesomes? Because they can't solve the three-body problem :awesome:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GHOSH-5)
    :awesome:

    Sounds awesome. I glanced at the sentence and was hoping on re-read for the neekiest pun ever, but it wasn't there (from what I saw) :tongue:
    The only thing i was going to ask is if that was too much context .

    From what i gather you mathmos reel in abstraction and would much rather have the differential equation and related boundary conditions than the inconvenience of physical relevance :p: :p: .
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by raceforthefishman)
    physical.....oh dear...hell no!


    Biochemistry :proud:
    (orga is where its at baby!)
    awwwwww yeah. I'm so rubbish at physical, much better and organic & biological chem (biochem, chemical bio and molecular biology :coma:).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    biology :afraid:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Locke)
    The only thing i was going to ask is if that was too much context .

    From what i gather you mathmos reel in abstraction and would much rather have the differential equation and related boundary conditions than the inconvenience of physical relevance :p: :p: .
    :tongue:

    Oh but of course, if something looks interesting, it is studied, regardless of it's relevance to the real world. Mathematicians churn out theories and equations, some of which are made use of by our practicial minions, made up of physicists, chemists, economists and what not. :tongue:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GHOSH-5)
    :tongue:

    Oh but of course, if something looks interesting, it is studied, regardless of it's relevance to the real world. Mathematicians churn out theories and equations, some of which are made use of by our practicial minions, made up of physicists, chemists, economists and what not. :tongue:
    Touché :hat2:.

    But if we're talking purity, philosophy has you licked :p: .
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Locke)
    Touché :hat2:.

    But if we're talking purity, philosophy has you licked :p: .
    I disagree, I think Maths is more pure than Philosophy :tongue:
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 8, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up sugar, or salt?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.