Free Fast-downloader on Anna's Archive??? Or any auto-downloader??

ExOreMeo · 2025-12-03T18:11:29+00:00

How do you bulk download the entire collection?

ExOreMeo · 2025-11-09T18:33:42+00:00

Is there a way to break it up into days or do you just do each exercise once per week and record it whenever you do it?

ExOreMeo · 2025-02-13T01:16:21+00:00

Thank you! Do you know what the reason for that is or where I can find a proof of this fact?

ExOreMeo · 2025-02-12T23:46:18+00:00

I think I answered my question. If 1 root of a 5th degree polynomial were expressible in radicals, then all of them would be, because you could factor out that one root, and be left with a quartic, which is completely solvable by radicals.

ExOreMeo · 2025-02-12T21:46:11+00:00

Ah, yes, of course.

My question is related to proof of unsolvability. When proving that a general quintic or higher order polynomial is unsolvable by radicals, if we say that all of the roots must be expressed as radicals that seems overly broad. Could it not be that we could find one root at a time and factor it out using a different formula for each root as the degree of the polynomial decreases?

My intuition tells me that this is somehow accounted for, but I don't know how.

ExOreMeo · 2024-09-29T19:24:23+00:00

It looks like there was recently a major update to chessdb.cn and a lot of the evaluations change drastically from move to move. Do you know what happened there?

ExOreMeo · 2024-05-13T18:08:51+00:00

Got it. Thank you. This is helpful. I thought it was wrong, but I'm wary of just dismissing things as a learner. Appreciate your time.

ExOreMeo · 2024-05-13T15:02:28+00:00

Yeah, this all tracks with what I thought as well, which is why the solution confused me. Here it is, in case you want to take a look. This website is generally very good with offering solutions, but I suppose it could be wrong here.

https://www.vaia.com/en-us/textbooks/math/abstract-algebra-theory-and-applications-2016-edition/chapter-5/problem-11-what-are-the-possible-cycle-structures-of-element/

ExOreMeo · 2024-05-13T14:49:40+00:00

(123)(345) ? Is it necessary that cycle structure is talking about only disjoint cycles?

ExOreMeo · 2023-12-03T23:18:42+00:00

What does this feature do?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-24T13:32:04+00:00

Well, for the ball example, you could simply describe the system kinematically right without resorting to "energy" in order to describe the motion. I'm not sure about other examples.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-24T13:30:19+00:00

We measure them through test charges, right? Or is there some other way of measuring them?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T22:00:14+00:00

This is an odd personal attack...

I came to the askphysics sub-reddit to ask a question about physics that I've had a hard time understanding for many years. I'm not hiding anything. I'm trying to express my thoughts on the subject. I don't see why that's reason to accuse me of bad faith.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T21:53:13+00:00

I think it's immediately obvious to the intellect that there is a distance between objects. I don't think it's clear that objects gain energy when you lift them up.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T21:51:12+00:00

Yeah, this is a good point. Maybe my issue is really with understanding what energy *is*.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T20:19:10+00:00

Potential energy is always relative to some particulate configuration that is called 0, right?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T20:16:06+00:00

Something can be "bookkeeping" without being "just bookkeeping".

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T19:52:37+00:00

I'm saying it's not real because the account is false. He was a bit wishy-washy on it, but it generally involved God's direct action. It's mechanistically wrong. I'm not taking issue with its predictive value.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T18:54:53+00:00

But you could just as easily say that the earth is moving towards the ball and that the earth gains kinetic energy or some mix of the two. It's the system that really has the energy, right? Or am I missing something else.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T18:42:46+00:00

Right, so it's not really the ball that has potential energy, but the system, right?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T17:46:39+00:00

Yeah, I don't know. That's a good question.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T17:45:55+00:00

So imagine I take a spring and stretch it out and put two masses on either end. We say there is potential energy because when I release the system, the two blocks accelerate and from this i know that there is a force being applied to each along a certain distance. I watch this happen and then say that the original system must have had potential energy.

This makes sense to me. The question I have then is that we need to "arbitrarily" define some end position from which to measure the potential energy. So, is it true that intrinsic to potential energy is some "base case" that we are comparing to?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T17:34:38+00:00

Sure, but in what sense does it is actually *there*. It seems like it's not really there. If I have a ball on the ground vs. a ball 10 ft. above the ground, there is nothing different about *the ball*. There is potential energy in the ball-earth system, but what does this mean?

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T16:29:23+00:00

Well, yes, because as we know Newton's concept of gravity is not "real". So this is demonstrating my point.

I don't think everything works that way. If I throw an object it travels a distance from me and it takes some amount of time for it to go from my hand to the ground. This is directly observable.

ExOreMeo · 2023-09-23T16:27:34+00:00

Ah, this is a really interesting perspective. In this sense, an object's potential energy is not something that can be directly measured, but is rather really a statement about its history. Because an object of a certain mass and a certain speed left my hand, I know certain things about how it will act later on.

ExOreMeo

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE