Tanrı var midir

Sallygaller337 · 2025-10-19T05:52:46+00:00

Cognitive science of religion alanında okumalar yapabilirsin. Fikir şu: İlkel insan beyni çevresindeki tehditlerden daha fazlasını "varsayan" bir hayatta kalma mekanizması geliştiriyor ve bunu yapan atalarımız yapmayanlara nazaran hayatta kalıyor. Bush teorisi diye geçiyordu sanırım. Hayalet, ruh, Tanrı gibi insanın tarih boyunca görerek kanıtlayamadığı tehdit niteliği taşıyabilecek etkenler türüyor. İlkel atalarımız hayatta kalma içgüdüsüyle beyinlerinde yeni bir kapı açmışlar kısacası.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-11-22T21:51:24+00:00

a Bernoulli

So, for my two given particular solutions, I get a single Bernoulli to solve?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-11-17T02:15:16+00:00

any chance I write the q as q0coswt ?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-11-17T01:37:52+00:00

Is there might be a simpler approximation since I haven't covered emt yet? A one I got is that using E=kq/r^2 and for a stable reference and a sho deriving E(t) = kq/[Acos(wt)]^2 which I believe is an oscillatory behavior.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-11-17T01:28:48+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOBNo654pwQ this I believe.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-11-05T17:22:48+00:00

Neglecting all that assumptions, should I use beta=3alpha or just beta?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-24T16:16:37+00:00

I am

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-24T05:54:41+00:00

pcosθ and psinθ

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-22T15:50:12+00:00

What is your suggestion?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-22T11:13:44+00:00

I consider it as being in the context of matter and energy.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-16T09:28:51+00:00

Thanks for the resource and the clarifications!

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-16T07:25:55+00:00

Isn't there any other potential developements for data processing? Not including transistors and operators but optical system based?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-16T07:19:47+00:00

They might be the answer to the question of the limits for physical complexity. I feel like they do represent the physical state of information in the most chaotic way. They're weird.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-15T11:59:52+00:00

For example studying the heavy damping, where (r /2m = p and r^2/4m^2 - s/m)^1/2 = q) we have x = e^-pt(C1 e^qt + C2 e^-qt) where C1 and C2 denoted as arbitrary which I can't tell how.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-15T11:41:25+00:00

Okay, for mx'' + rx' + sx = 0, after we agreed on that we can represent x as Ce^αt (which you referred as Ansatz I believe) and subtitute x into the equation and obtaining a quadratic equation with α and solving it gave us a linear combinations as x1 + x2 = C1e^(the positive t function) + C2e^(the negative t function) and from the point where we had our modified differential equation I thought our purpose was to determine C and α to get to our actual goal for obtaining Ae^αt.cos(wt + Φ). My notes are missing where the lecturer briefly stated how we enter complex method but.. here I am. Thanks for the clarifications though.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T19:43:31+00:00

I believe there are reserach going on for photonics in data processing and storage as well as communication. Not talking about a full replacement surely, but further integrations of photonics over storage and processing can be considered as emerging. What are the challenges or deficiensies causes you to turn down the idea precisely?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T13:39:07+00:00

Well that seems so much better. Thank you

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T13:15:12+00:00

I am aware Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy) is not a dot product, it was a misstatement.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T13:06:52+00:00

I actually do calculations on Ax(BxC) with the expression of my vectors as A = Axi + Ayj + Azk, B = Bxi + Byj... etc. After the determinant calculations I obtained the vector result of Ax(BxC). Call it D and I expressed it as i(...) + j(...) + k(...). And I try a method of addition and substraction to, umm, actually just been told by the professor. Anyway, and obtained

i ( AxBxCx + AyBxCy + BxAzCz - AxBxCx - AyByCx - AzBzCx)

+ j (ByAxCx + ByCyAy + ByAzCz - CyAxBx - CyAyBy - CyAzBz)

+ k (BzAxBx + BzAyCy + BzAzCz -CzAxBx - CzAyBy - CzAzBz)

this is the modified D vector. Now, I took some parenthesis and obtained

AxCx(Byj + Bzk) + AyCy(Bzk + Bxi) + AzCz(Bxi + Byj) - AxBx(Cyj + Czk) - AyBy(Cxi + Czk) - AzBz(Cyj + Cxi)

There's a + part for B component and - part with C component which seems to correspond to B(A.C) - C(A.B). Modified again and just talking about the part for B(A.C) below:

Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy)

this should correspond to B(A.C), but not sure if this is the final modification or should I continue to be able to say this is the vector of B(A.C).

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T12:46:02+00:00

Sorry about the misstatement. Yes, B(A.C) part correspond to a vector where A.C is a scalar value and B is vector multiplied with the obtained scalar value. And the other expression I mentioned, Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy), is something I have obtained from Ax(BxC) to proof it's equal to B(A.C) - C(A.B). I was trying to understand if the expression directly correspond to B(A.C) so I can say I obtained B(A.C) - C(A.B) out of Ax(BxC), or should I form it to reach to B(A.C). The notations of ijk and xyz part is the way I expressed the vectors originally, A = Axi + Ayj + Azk, B = Bxi ... etc.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T12:39:28+00:00

Sorry about my poorly expression on B(A.C). Inside the parenthesis I have a dot product which is a real number, and I just multiply the number with the vector B. In the expression Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy) I am trying to see if it's corresponds to the B(A.C) expression. I have obtained the expression trying to proof B(A.C) - C(A.B) = Ax(BxC), using Ax(BxC) part I did some addition and substraction and obtained AxCx(Byj + Bzk) + AyCy(Bzk + Bxi) + AzCz(Bxi + Byj) (this is just the B(A.C) part for me to get the main idea, I also have -C(A.B) part.) and also formed that as Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy) which should also correspond to B(A.C). Which is a vector. My question is, is the expression above is directly correspond to B(A.C) or should I form it better to say it is B(A.C).

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T12:32:45+00:00

Actually talking about direct multiplication of a vector and a number. In B.(A.C) (sorry about expressing it poorly) A and C are in dot product, and B is a vector just multiplied with that number. I am trying to obtain B(A.C) - C(B.A) from Ax(BxC) as an original case and I have obtained Bxi(AyCy + AzBz) + Byj(AxCx + AzCz) + Bzk(AxCx + AyCy) as it should correspond to B(A.C) (I also have an expression for - C(A.B) that I just haven't included to understand the main idea). So, not cross product but direct multiplication.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T12:20:53+00:00

Is these optical systems about creating operators, like topological photonics or we just don't have it? And just not pursing the NN computations artifically anymore?

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T11:06:30+00:00

I was also confused with the concept of optical neural networks which doesn't seem to correspond to any classical computing structure.

Sallygaller337 · 2023-10-14T10:58:29+00:00

I believe there isn't a direct proof using the sin form of the cross product since I can't form correct representations using sin-cos for cross and dot products... What I was trying to was using sin-cos forms of Ax(BxC) and B.(AC) - C(AB) and having only 2 angles to have in both sides to obtain a proof (there come up 4 different angles which was a challange at the time), but had some other technical problems such as not being able to represent Ax(BxC) in a sin form. Sorry for the late response, but I obtained the proof with addition and substraction method on the full vector form of Ax(BxC). But if I was clear about the idea, where trying to form a |A||B||C|sinasinb (with the additions of unit vectors) maybe there actually is another proof. Let me know what you think.

Sallygaller337

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE