Sunday, July 10, 2005
*sigh*
I watched, broken hearted, as those who have lost mourned for their dead. The flowers lined the stations where the attacks had occurred, people distraught, in tears.
I watched on as those who know not the fate of their love ones fought back their tears and attempted to regain composure.
My mother could have died. My cousins, my friends, my loved ones who live in London could have been among the victims dead, missing or injured. Thankfully they were not. My mother is in Vienna, thank god.
It still doesn't make me any happier. My homeland is in distress. I'm in distress. This hits me harder like no others because it happened to my country. My England. From now on, I will wage my personal war against radical Islam. NO more politically correct bullshit of war on terror for the terror stems from this ill-gotten idealogy, this backward, archaic religion. There will be no more tolerance.
I watched, broken hearted, as those who have lost mourned for their dead. The flowers lined the stations where the attacks had occurred, people distraught, in tears.
I watched on as those who know not the fate of their love ones fought back their tears and attempted to regain composure.
My mother could have died. My cousins, my friends, my loved ones who live in London could have been among the victims dead, missing or injured. Thankfully they were not. My mother is in Vienna, thank god.
It still doesn't make me any happier. My homeland is in distress. I'm in distress. This hits me harder like no others because it happened to my country. My England. From now on, I will wage my personal war against radical Islam. NO more politically correct bullshit of war on terror for the terror stems from this ill-gotten idealogy, this backward, archaic religion. There will be no more tolerance.
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
ARRRGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I knew there was a good reason for why I always have headphones in my ears or why I'm always reading whilst tramming to and from school: TO BLOCK OUT THE STUPIDITY OF THE OUTSIDE WORLD!
Imagine this: A stuffy, sonorous interior of a tram stuffed full with talkative highschool students. Imagine listening to the conversations going on around you and imagine what they are actually saying.
Student 1: Like, I asked her if we can make alcohol out of like, you know, like milk. And she was like "Yes" and I was like "Meat?" And she was like "No"
Student 2: Wow, she's like, so nice. I wish I have her.
Student 1: Yeah, she's the greatest teacher, she knows a lot of stuff, but like, she can't, like teach.
That was only 1 out of 10 of the conversations going on around me, all very very similar in that the people who initiate and participate in these conversations are
INARTICULATE FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Allow me to elaborate. Note the number of times student 1 in the above sample mentioned the word "like" out of context. Is this student merely an inarticulate fool lacking a grasp of the English language, or merely an example of our declining educational standards. Actually, this person could be both.
What is wrong with being able to string together a proper without over using the words "like" and "You know"? Is it really to hard to stop, think out your sentence before you speak? I wonder if these people would actually feel stupid if they listen to themselves speak? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS!
I say anyone who uses the words "like" and "you know" out of context in a sentence, repeating it to death and using it in the place of a proper conjuction should be sent to Remedial English for a year until they learn to speak properly! ARGGGH!! I'll never forget my walkman again!
I knew there was a good reason for why I always have headphones in my ears or why I'm always reading whilst tramming to and from school: TO BLOCK OUT THE STUPIDITY OF THE OUTSIDE WORLD!
Imagine this: A stuffy, sonorous interior of a tram stuffed full with talkative highschool students. Imagine listening to the conversations going on around you and imagine what they are actually saying.
Student 1: Like, I asked her if we can make alcohol out of like, you know, like milk. And she was like "Yes" and I was like "Meat?" And she was like "No"
Student 2: Wow, she's like, so nice. I wish I have her.
Student 1: Yeah, she's the greatest teacher, she knows a lot of stuff, but like, she can't, like teach.
That was only 1 out of 10 of the conversations going on around me, all very very similar in that the people who initiate and participate in these conversations are
INARTICULATE FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Allow me to elaborate. Note the number of times student 1 in the above sample mentioned the word "like" out of context. Is this student merely an inarticulate fool lacking a grasp of the English language, or merely an example of our declining educational standards. Actually, this person could be both.
What is wrong with being able to string together a proper without over using the words "like" and "You know"? Is it really to hard to stop, think out your sentence before you speak? I wonder if these people would actually feel stupid if they listen to themselves speak? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS!
I say anyone who uses the words "like" and "you know" out of context in a sentence, repeating it to death and using it in the place of a proper conjuction should be sent to Remedial English for a year until they learn to speak properly! ARGGGH!! I'll never forget my walkman again!
Sunday, June 05, 2005
Physics 101
Physics unit three exam tomorrow, urgh. I'm not suppose to be online, but I've had it up to here with physics. I can safely say I'm saturated with motion in one and two dimensions. I even took a walk so I could make little observations in my head. Well, this is basically my excuse for coming online, that and I missed Glenn.
Basic motion
We all know the good old speed=distance/time thing right? That's you're absolute basic basic physics. Want to know how long it'll take you to drive to Brighton on a beautiful Saturday afternoon? s=d/t is always very very helpful. Ok, this only works for constant or average speed. What if we start accelerating, huh huh? How's that going to help you? huh? You're screwed aint ya? well, that's why I'm here.
Distance is a scalar. What does that mean? It means it only has a magnitude. For example, if you were to look in the Melways, you would be able to find a route to Brighton from your house. If you use the scale, you can use a peace of string to trace out that route and measure the length of the journey, that's a distance. Displacement is something quite different. Displacement is a vector. A vector is a basically an line with a magnitude AND direction. Lets go back to the melways. So you've found the distance between here and Brighton. Instead of that tedious piece of string, take a ruler and join a straight line, a direct path, even if you have to drive on water, and there you have it, a displacement. Ok, now you have the general idea, here are some examples.
Imagine if I were to walk from one end of the room to the other and back again. The length of the room is 20m. I would have walked a TOTAL DISTANCE of 40m. My displacement, however, is zero. It's not how far I've travelled, but how far I am from my original position, and since I'm back in my original position, I've been displaced by 0m. Got the idea? Ok, moving on.
Acceleration. You can have acceleration in vector and scalar form, doesn't matter an ant's toenail whatsoever. Only difference is, in vector form, it has a direction, which is important for working out net force. Acceleration is how you "speed up" in a given time. a=m/s/s or m/s^2.
Here's the tricky part with vector acceleration. Now listen very. very. very carefully. We'll designate RIGHT as positive. As you are speeding up to the right, you will have a positive acceleration and a large one at that. As you are slowing down, the instant you start to slow down, you are slowing down on the right, but you are PICKING UP SPEED to the left. Yes, as soon as you're slowing down in one direction you are picking up speed in the other. Example.
As you are falling off a building, your acceleration is downwards/ As soon as you crash into the ground, you are decelerating in the downwards direction and accelerating upwards into your bones and and your soft squishy tissues.
Velocity. Oh dear, I put it after acceleration. Hmm, anyway! Velocity is the vector version of speed. Velocity is not distance over time. It is DISPLACEMENT over time. Example:
I walk accross the room again. The room is 20 m long. I walk there and back one in 10 seconds. I would have travelled a distance of 40 m in 10s. My speed would be 4 meters per second. My displacement, however, is 0. I've been displaced 0m, in 10 seconds, so therefore, my velocity for that given time span is 0. Isn't life wonderful with vectors?
Oh, and very important fact once again. CONSTANT velocity has 0 acceleration. In other word's you're not speeding up or slowing down.
Time is easy. time stays the same. I wouldn't, however, bring this up with Jennifer Zhu. She would argue that time is a vector, but since we have not yet discovered time travel, we can ignore Jennifer Zhu.
Now, Onto Newton's laws.
First law is the law of inertia. An object will remain at rest of moving unless acted on by another force. For example. You're driving in a car, without your seatbelt on, because you're a moron who didn't pay attention at driving school and didn't do physics, and you crash. Since you didn't wear your seat belt, you are still travelling at the same velocity your car had been travelling at when you crashed. Although your car has stopped, you haven't, because you haven't been restrain and your head smashes through the windscreen. HAH, that will teach for not wearing your seat belt. There, physics at work.
Ok, you're sitting at the traffic lights, you do not have the head rest on your seat, because your wife borrowed it for something. An incompetent jerk crashes into you and puushes your car forwards. Your head was happy sitting still, so it continued to stay still as your body travels forward leaving your head behind and you get whiplashed. There, never forget inertia.
Newton's second law. force is proportional to force and acceleration. F=ma. Now this is why acceleration is important. The greater the acceleration, the greater the force. The greater the mass, the greater the force. The greater the mass and acceleration, the GREATER the force. What is acceleration again? It's how fast you can speed up over a given period of time.
So if acceleration is m/s/s, and f=ma, when you fall off that building, you better pray you have the mass of a speck of dust, or that you fall very very very very very very slowly. Given that you would fall at 9.8ms^-2, that's not going to be an option. Another thing you can pray fall, if that a giant marshmallow conveniently appears below you and break your fall. How will this marshmallow help? Well, it will increase the period of time over which you accelerate upwards (or decelerate in the downward direction), therefore decreasing your acceleration and lessening the force.Since the force isn't so big, you'd hopefully live to see another day. Oh, btw, force is measured in N (Newtons).
CONSTANT velocity has ZERO NET FORCE. NET FORCE meaning total number of forces = ZERO, but don't be fooled, if somebody was ripping you appart in both directions with a constant velocity, you'd definitely feel a force. Why do you feel pain when someone punches you at constant velocity? Well, think about it, when they punch you, they're actually slowing down very quickly. Not only will you feel pain, but so would they....
Newton's third law (and most well known): Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Forces work in pairs. That would explain why the jerk who punched you has bleeding knuckles.
If you punch a wall, and hurt yourself, you can infact say that the wall had punched you. Why? Because Newton's third law said so. If you are driving at constant velocity, that means your driving force equals the retarding forces acting against you. See? Isn't physics great?
Now, onto more complicated issues. Momentum. Momentum is a vector. Momentum isn't really a force, or energy, it's a measure of something. Very very hard to explain.
Momentum (p)=mass x velocity.
Remember how force is Force=mass x acceleration?
This is mass by velocity. Momentum. If a bat, mass approx. 20g flew at you at 50m/s, it's going to be easier to stop and cause less damage than an oil tanker on wheels travelling at you at 50m/s.
Momentum has to be conserved. That means the total momentum of a system must be the same before and after a collision.
Remember Newton's second law? It can be rewritten as
Fnet = mass (final velocity - initial velocity)/ change in time.
Remember how Fnet= mass x acceleration? Acceleration is final velocity over initial velocity over the change in time.
Therefore.
Fnet x the change in time = the impulse (change in momentum).
Impulse and momentum are used a lot in collision calculations. So is net force. Momentum is also measured in N.
Oh gods, so much more to go, and I bet you're not even reading this crap, whoever you are.
ENERGY!
Energy comes in many many forms. Chemical potential, thermal, kinetics, gravitational potential, strain, elastic potential, etc. Energy is measured in J (joules) and is not a vector. Here is a very basic rule
Energy can neither be made nor destroyed, but transfered from one form to another.
WORK is energy being transformed from one form to another. Work = distance x force. How much energy is transformed from one type to another as you push it along.
Kinetic energy = .5mv^2 (For moving things)
Strain potential = .5kx^2 (used in springs)
Grav. potential = mgh (for things that are very high up)
m = mass
g = gravitational constant 9.8
h = height or displacement
X = displacement
k = stiffness factor
PHEW! Not far to go, only projectiles and circular motion, and we're done for motion!
Projectiles. When ignoring air resistance, the only force acting on them is gravity. For example, a human canon is a projectile, a baseball that's been batted is a projectile, projectile vomit is a projectile. They all have one thing in common...they're not being propelled by other things.
Projectiles follow a parabolic trajectory.
Projectiles have a constant horizontal velocity.
The only net force (when ignoring air resistance) is down, and that's due to gravity (9.8m/s/s)
Use constant acceleration equations and energy if you need to work out something.
OH! Forgot to give constant acceleration equations. Ok, here goes!
V=u+at
S=.5(v+u)t
S=ut+.5at^2
S=vt-.5at^2
v^2=u^2+2aS
I think that's it.
t=time
S=displacement
u=initial velocity
v=final velocity
a=acceleration
OK! That's done! What next? Oh...circular motion...right.
Ok. When you are moving in a circle, even at constant velocity, you are accelerating. Why? You are constantly changing direction. You want to head straight, but you're not, because somehting is causing you keep going in a circle, and that thing is called THE CENTRIPETAL FORCE. For example, you tie your bad dog to a peg in the middle of the garden. He runs forward, but find he can't get anywhere because he's running in a circle. The force is the tension in the rope leading to that one peg. Hence, circular motion.
v=2(pi)r/T
a=v^2/r
F=mv^2/r
(formula time! Joyous!)
Basic formulae, those with mathematical skills and transpose and get whatever else you want from it.
Ok,thats done for now. Onto other things...
Look, I can't give a stuff about gravity right now, it's boring. All you need to know is that everything, absolutely everything with mass has attraction. If a brick and a kipper were the only objects in existence, floating about in the galaxy, they will eventually find their way to one another because of their attraction, but that's very small. Infact, it's 6.67x10^-11. Very small indeed.
Hmm...what's next? Oh, bloody, no. Electricity, I HATE electricity, but here goes. It's 9:36, I've been doing this for hours now! Ok...here goes.
The components in a circuit all have a potential difference over them. For example, a light bulb. If a lightbulb and a 1.5V battery were put in a circuit, all the voltage would dissipate over that lightbulb, because that's the only device in there with considerable resistance. Formula time!
current is the rate of coulombs moving through a circuit. A coulomb is a unit of charge, meaning a bunch of electrons. A bunch of electrons will have a certain amount of charge, and that charge they call electricity. anyway, the charge held by one electron is so small, they decided to bunch up a bunch of electrons, and say that charge is 1 coulomb (C). Anyway, back to current. It's basically the speed it moves around. Current is I and is measured in amperes (A)
I= Q(charge)/t in measured in Amperes or C/s, but if you want marks, stick with A.
Voltage. Voltage is how much energy is carried by one coulomb. 1 V means 1 Joule is carried by 1 coloumb.
V=W(work)/Q(charge, or coloumb) units...Volts or J/C (joules per couloumb)
Power is the rate of energy that's being transformed from one form to another. In the case of electricity, it's how much chemical energy or what not is being transferred into electrical energy and that in turn is being transfered into light, sound, heat, etc.
P=W/t (power is work on time. It's J/s or a Watt)
P=IV
V=IR (R is resistance)
Lets talk about devices in circuits. All devices of resistance. Without it, they are practically useless, because the energy wouldn't be converted otherwise because no work would be done. Wires have very very very low resistance, but in calculations, they are not counted as devices with potential difference. Over these devices, that's when the voltage drops.
Resistance and current shares an inverse relationship. The more resistance, the less current. Imagine a big hill and climbing up a big hill. Can you honestly run up a hill as you would a straight path? Well, no, thta's exactly how a coulomb feels when it encounters resistance. It needs to use up all that energy to over come that resistance, therefore it goes very slowly, and loses energy along the way. It SLOWS down. So the higher the resistance, the lower the current.
Oh gosh, my fingers hurt. I'll continue next time, probably on thursday.
Physics unit three exam tomorrow, urgh. I'm not suppose to be online, but I've had it up to here with physics. I can safely say I'm saturated with motion in one and two dimensions. I even took a walk so I could make little observations in my head. Well, this is basically my excuse for coming online, that and I missed Glenn.
Basic motion
We all know the good old speed=distance/time thing right? That's you're absolute basic basic physics. Want to know how long it'll take you to drive to Brighton on a beautiful Saturday afternoon? s=d/t is always very very helpful. Ok, this only works for constant or average speed. What if we start accelerating, huh huh? How's that going to help you? huh? You're screwed aint ya? well, that's why I'm here.
Distance is a scalar. What does that mean? It means it only has a magnitude. For example, if you were to look in the Melways, you would be able to find a route to Brighton from your house. If you use the scale, you can use a peace of string to trace out that route and measure the length of the journey, that's a distance. Displacement is something quite different. Displacement is a vector. A vector is a basically an line with a magnitude AND direction. Lets go back to the melways. So you've found the distance between here and Brighton. Instead of that tedious piece of string, take a ruler and join a straight line, a direct path, even if you have to drive on water, and there you have it, a displacement. Ok, now you have the general idea, here are some examples.
Imagine if I were to walk from one end of the room to the other and back again. The length of the room is 20m. I would have walked a TOTAL DISTANCE of 40m. My displacement, however, is zero. It's not how far I've travelled, but how far I am from my original position, and since I'm back in my original position, I've been displaced by 0m. Got the idea? Ok, moving on.
Acceleration. You can have acceleration in vector and scalar form, doesn't matter an ant's toenail whatsoever. Only difference is, in vector form, it has a direction, which is important for working out net force. Acceleration is how you "speed up" in a given time. a=m/s/s or m/s^2.
Here's the tricky part with vector acceleration. Now listen very. very. very carefully. We'll designate RIGHT as positive. As you are speeding up to the right, you will have a positive acceleration and a large one at that. As you are slowing down, the instant you start to slow down, you are slowing down on the right, but you are PICKING UP SPEED to the left. Yes, as soon as you're slowing down in one direction you are picking up speed in the other. Example.
As you are falling off a building, your acceleration is downwards/ As soon as you crash into the ground, you are decelerating in the downwards direction and accelerating upwards into your bones and and your soft squishy tissues.
Velocity. Oh dear, I put it after acceleration. Hmm, anyway! Velocity is the vector version of speed. Velocity is not distance over time. It is DISPLACEMENT over time. Example:
I walk accross the room again. The room is 20 m long. I walk there and back one in 10 seconds. I would have travelled a distance of 40 m in 10s. My speed would be 4 meters per second. My displacement, however, is 0. I've been displaced 0m, in 10 seconds, so therefore, my velocity for that given time span is 0. Isn't life wonderful with vectors?
Oh, and very important fact once again. CONSTANT velocity has 0 acceleration. In other word's you're not speeding up or slowing down.
Time is easy. time stays the same. I wouldn't, however, bring this up with Jennifer Zhu. She would argue that time is a vector, but since we have not yet discovered time travel, we can ignore Jennifer Zhu.
Now, Onto Newton's laws.
First law is the law of inertia. An object will remain at rest of moving unless acted on by another force. For example. You're driving in a car, without your seatbelt on, because you're a moron who didn't pay attention at driving school and didn't do physics, and you crash. Since you didn't wear your seat belt, you are still travelling at the same velocity your car had been travelling at when you crashed. Although your car has stopped, you haven't, because you haven't been restrain and your head smashes through the windscreen. HAH, that will teach for not wearing your seat belt. There, physics at work.
Ok, you're sitting at the traffic lights, you do not have the head rest on your seat, because your wife borrowed it for something. An incompetent jerk crashes into you and puushes your car forwards. Your head was happy sitting still, so it continued to stay still as your body travels forward leaving your head behind and you get whiplashed. There, never forget inertia.
Newton's second law. force is proportional to force and acceleration. F=ma. Now this is why acceleration is important. The greater the acceleration, the greater the force. The greater the mass, the greater the force. The greater the mass and acceleration, the GREATER the force. What is acceleration again? It's how fast you can speed up over a given period of time.
So if acceleration is m/s/s, and f=ma, when you fall off that building, you better pray you have the mass of a speck of dust, or that you fall very very very very very very slowly. Given that you would fall at 9.8ms^-2, that's not going to be an option. Another thing you can pray fall, if that a giant marshmallow conveniently appears below you and break your fall. How will this marshmallow help? Well, it will increase the period of time over which you accelerate upwards (or decelerate in the downward direction), therefore decreasing your acceleration and lessening the force.Since the force isn't so big, you'd hopefully live to see another day. Oh, btw, force is measured in N (Newtons).
CONSTANT velocity has ZERO NET FORCE. NET FORCE meaning total number of forces = ZERO, but don't be fooled, if somebody was ripping you appart in both directions with a constant velocity, you'd definitely feel a force. Why do you feel pain when someone punches you at constant velocity? Well, think about it, when they punch you, they're actually slowing down very quickly. Not only will you feel pain, but so would they....
Newton's third law (and most well known): Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Forces work in pairs. That would explain why the jerk who punched you has bleeding knuckles.
If you punch a wall, and hurt yourself, you can infact say that the wall had punched you. Why? Because Newton's third law said so. If you are driving at constant velocity, that means your driving force equals the retarding forces acting against you. See? Isn't physics great?
Now, onto more complicated issues. Momentum. Momentum is a vector. Momentum isn't really a force, or energy, it's a measure of something. Very very hard to explain.
Momentum (p)=mass x velocity.
Remember how force is Force=mass x acceleration?
This is mass by velocity. Momentum. If a bat, mass approx. 20g flew at you at 50m/s, it's going to be easier to stop and cause less damage than an oil tanker on wheels travelling at you at 50m/s.
Momentum has to be conserved. That means the total momentum of a system must be the same before and after a collision.
Remember Newton's second law? It can be rewritten as
Fnet = mass (final velocity - initial velocity)/ change in time.
Remember how Fnet= mass x acceleration? Acceleration is final velocity over initial velocity over the change in time.
Therefore.
Fnet x the change in time = the impulse (change in momentum).
Impulse and momentum are used a lot in collision calculations. So is net force. Momentum is also measured in N.
Oh gods, so much more to go, and I bet you're not even reading this crap, whoever you are.
ENERGY!
Energy comes in many many forms. Chemical potential, thermal, kinetics, gravitational potential, strain, elastic potential, etc. Energy is measured in J (joules) and is not a vector. Here is a very basic rule
Energy can neither be made nor destroyed, but transfered from one form to another.
WORK is energy being transformed from one form to another. Work = distance x force. How much energy is transformed from one type to another as you push it along.
Kinetic energy = .5mv^2 (For moving things)
Strain potential = .5kx^2 (used in springs)
Grav. potential = mgh (for things that are very high up)
m = mass
g = gravitational constant 9.8
h = height or displacement
X = displacement
k = stiffness factor
PHEW! Not far to go, only projectiles and circular motion, and we're done for motion!
Projectiles. When ignoring air resistance, the only force acting on them is gravity. For example, a human canon is a projectile, a baseball that's been batted is a projectile, projectile vomit is a projectile. They all have one thing in common...they're not being propelled by other things.
Projectiles follow a parabolic trajectory.
Projectiles have a constant horizontal velocity.
The only net force (when ignoring air resistance) is down, and that's due to gravity (9.8m/s/s)
Use constant acceleration equations and energy if you need to work out something.
OH! Forgot to give constant acceleration equations. Ok, here goes!
V=u+at
S=.5(v+u)t
S=ut+.5at^2
S=vt-.5at^2
v^2=u^2+2aS
I think that's it.
t=time
S=displacement
u=initial velocity
v=final velocity
a=acceleration
OK! That's done! What next? Oh...circular motion...right.
Ok. When you are moving in a circle, even at constant velocity, you are accelerating. Why? You are constantly changing direction. You want to head straight, but you're not, because somehting is causing you keep going in a circle, and that thing is called THE CENTRIPETAL FORCE. For example, you tie your bad dog to a peg in the middle of the garden. He runs forward, but find he can't get anywhere because he's running in a circle. The force is the tension in the rope leading to that one peg. Hence, circular motion.
v=2(pi)r/T
a=v^2/r
F=mv^2/r
(formula time! Joyous!)
Basic formulae, those with mathematical skills and transpose and get whatever else you want from it.
Ok,thats done for now. Onto other things...
Look, I can't give a stuff about gravity right now, it's boring. All you need to know is that everything, absolutely everything with mass has attraction. If a brick and a kipper were the only objects in existence, floating about in the galaxy, they will eventually find their way to one another because of their attraction, but that's very small. Infact, it's 6.67x10^-11. Very small indeed.
Hmm...what's next? Oh, bloody, no. Electricity, I HATE electricity, but here goes. It's 9:36, I've been doing this for hours now! Ok...here goes.
The components in a circuit all have a potential difference over them. For example, a light bulb. If a lightbulb and a 1.5V battery were put in a circuit, all the voltage would dissipate over that lightbulb, because that's the only device in there with considerable resistance. Formula time!
current is the rate of coulombs moving through a circuit. A coulomb is a unit of charge, meaning a bunch of electrons. A bunch of electrons will have a certain amount of charge, and that charge they call electricity. anyway, the charge held by one electron is so small, they decided to bunch up a bunch of electrons, and say that charge is 1 coulomb (C). Anyway, back to current. It's basically the speed it moves around. Current is I and is measured in amperes (A)
I= Q(charge)/t in measured in Amperes or C/s, but if you want marks, stick with A.
Voltage. Voltage is how much energy is carried by one coulomb. 1 V means 1 Joule is carried by 1 coloumb.
V=W(work)/Q(charge, or coloumb) units...Volts or J/C (joules per couloumb)
Power is the rate of energy that's being transformed from one form to another. In the case of electricity, it's how much chemical energy or what not is being transferred into electrical energy and that in turn is being transfered into light, sound, heat, etc.
P=W/t (power is work on time. It's J/s or a Watt)
P=IV
V=IR (R is resistance)
Lets talk about devices in circuits. All devices of resistance. Without it, they are practically useless, because the energy wouldn't be converted otherwise because no work would be done. Wires have very very very low resistance, but in calculations, they are not counted as devices with potential difference. Over these devices, that's when the voltage drops.
Resistance and current shares an inverse relationship. The more resistance, the less current. Imagine a big hill and climbing up a big hill. Can you honestly run up a hill as you would a straight path? Well, no, thta's exactly how a coulomb feels when it encounters resistance. It needs to use up all that energy to over come that resistance, therefore it goes very slowly, and loses energy along the way. It SLOWS down. So the higher the resistance, the lower the current.
Oh gosh, my fingers hurt. I'll continue next time, probably on thursday.
Friday, May 27, 2005
An insignificant thread in the tapestry of life...
Just another asian, like every other asian. I have brown eyes, I have deep brown hair...like every other asian. I have about the same skin colour as every other asian. Oh how damn boring. What does that say about we asians? Could this be due to centuries of inbreeding(notice my lack of capitalisation of the A in asian)? Then again, I'm not alone. There are millions of asians out there who look just like every other asian. There are millions of negroes who look like every other negro, dark skin, dark hair, dark eyes. White people have different coloured hair and different coloured eyes. Even negroes have albinos. I have never seen an asian albino. I'm sure they exist, but I have never even heard of one.
I guess as my eyesight deteriorates on a daily basis, I'm finding it hard to distinguish certain people from afar. Kylie i can always pick out because of her big hair, Bell because of her red hair and Laura because of her "interesting" hair. For all my other friends, it's a bit more daunting. Finding it hard to even recognise Jenny, Daveen, Ariel, Elaine...you guessed it...the asians! Karren I can recognise because of her small stature and oversized clothing, but for everyone else, it's hard. I know, I should get my eyes checked out, but I'm far too busy right now. actually, I can barely make out what I'm typing on the monitor. Anyway, it made me realize, that I don't look any different from them. There's nothing about me which sets me apart. I can always recognise natalie devatsakis due to her voice and her enormous tits, but I have no big boobs and my voice isn't distinctive. I guess I have my long hair...but really what's the point in having long hair if it's just brown? I want to dye it a shiny and artificial white colour and get grey or hazel contacts. Not only will I violate everybody's personal aesthetics, I will incite projectile vomitting from my parents! I don't want to be just another faceless person. When people see me, I want them to think "Ew, what a horror! I'm gonna have nightmares now" or "Jesus, that girl looks interesting" or "I want her for my prime minister!" Don't ask me how that works...wait, my brain is turning into mush. Lemme rest a while.
Just another asian, like every other asian. I have brown eyes, I have deep brown hair...like every other asian. I have about the same skin colour as every other asian. Oh how damn boring. What does that say about we asians? Could this be due to centuries of inbreeding(notice my lack of capitalisation of the A in asian)? Then again, I'm not alone. There are millions of asians out there who look just like every other asian. There are millions of negroes who look like every other negro, dark skin, dark hair, dark eyes. White people have different coloured hair and different coloured eyes. Even negroes have albinos. I have never seen an asian albino. I'm sure they exist, but I have never even heard of one.
I guess as my eyesight deteriorates on a daily basis, I'm finding it hard to distinguish certain people from afar. Kylie i can always pick out because of her big hair, Bell because of her red hair and Laura because of her "interesting" hair. For all my other friends, it's a bit more daunting. Finding it hard to even recognise Jenny, Daveen, Ariel, Elaine...you guessed it...the asians! Karren I can recognise because of her small stature and oversized clothing, but for everyone else, it's hard. I know, I should get my eyes checked out, but I'm far too busy right now. actually, I can barely make out what I'm typing on the monitor. Anyway, it made me realize, that I don't look any different from them. There's nothing about me which sets me apart. I can always recognise natalie devatsakis due to her voice and her enormous tits, but I have no big boobs and my voice isn't distinctive. I guess I have my long hair...but really what's the point in having long hair if it's just brown? I want to dye it a shiny and artificial white colour and get grey or hazel contacts. Not only will I violate everybody's personal aesthetics, I will incite projectile vomitting from my parents! I don't want to be just another faceless person. When people see me, I want them to think "Ew, what a horror! I'm gonna have nightmares now" or "Jesus, that girl looks interesting" or "I want her for my prime minister!" Don't ask me how that works...wait, my brain is turning into mush. Lemme rest a while.
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Hello
http://www.nationalreview.com/books/vuoto200505200839.asp
That above article is book review. The book is about the wage gap between the genders and how it is the way is it.
Personally, I agree. It's an unfair world, I know, to have to give up a high paying job to be a mother, but it's the way things are. If women want good pay, work in science. I'm planning to work in science so I can have the best of both worlds. I will be a filthy rich consultant, and have at least half a kid. There. what a brilliant plan. Destined not to fail.
Anyway, as you can tell, I'm so dead. 10 SACs was way too many. I have 6 SACS next week. Fuck. I'm not stressed, but I feel it tugging at my sleeve. Must drink tea. Meanwhile, discussion will be postpone until I've finished taking notes, and studying and crap.
http://www.nationalreview.com/books/vuoto200505200839.asp
That above article is book review. The book is about the wage gap between the genders and how it is the way is it.
Personally, I agree. It's an unfair world, I know, to have to give up a high paying job to be a mother, but it's the way things are. If women want good pay, work in science. I'm planning to work in science so I can have the best of both worlds. I will be a filthy rich consultant, and have at least half a kid. There. what a brilliant plan. Destined not to fail.
Anyway, as you can tell, I'm so dead. 10 SACs was way too many. I have 6 SACS next week. Fuck. I'm not stressed, but I feel it tugging at my sleeve. Must drink tea. Meanwhile, discussion will be postpone until I've finished taking notes, and studying and crap.
Sunday, May 15, 2005
Ok...
Thank you, Glenn, for contributing to this discussion. First off, I want to say, I wrote a 10 page english essay on "Breaker Morant" for the exam on Thursday, and I am so drained I don't even think I'll survive this week.
Ok, PLC shop ripped me off. I got the bill for my school fees and stuff I purchased at PLC shop. According to the bill, I bought a TRACK JACKET for $110 fucking dollars, and 1m contact. WHAT THE FUCK? I HAVE MADE NO SUCH TRANSACTIONS! ARGH! They're gonna get an earful from me tomorrow!
Ok, my contribution to the debate. Where was I? Ah yes, I was defining the various camps of anti-americans. Here is my next contribution.
Communists. What is a communist? A communist is a supporter of totalitarianism and so called followers of Marx. They justify their flawed and failed ideologies as being benificial for mankind. They are anti globalism, anti-capitalism, anti-religion, anti private industries and the list goes on. They support dictators, their ideologies have spawned dictators, their dictators are responsible for more deaths than the two world wars combined, and their dictators are corrupt as hell. Nowadays we no longer have communists so much as "pseudo-commies". Pseudo-commies are the younger generation, totally ignorant of history, and lacking in common sense. They have chosen to ignore the fact that whilst their dictators lived in luxury, the people under them toiled, suffered, and died of famine. Stalin was responsible for the death of 20 million of his own people, and Mao, 30 million. Che Guevara, a ruthless killer, is their icon...
Any wonder why they hate America? Tune in next time, when I can be arsed to go on. This is going to be one massive essay!
Thank you, Glenn, for contributing to this discussion. First off, I want to say, I wrote a 10 page english essay on "Breaker Morant" for the exam on Thursday, and I am so drained I don't even think I'll survive this week.
Ok, PLC shop ripped me off. I got the bill for my school fees and stuff I purchased at PLC shop. According to the bill, I bought a TRACK JACKET for $110 fucking dollars, and 1m contact. WHAT THE FUCK? I HAVE MADE NO SUCH TRANSACTIONS! ARGH! They're gonna get an earful from me tomorrow!
Ok, my contribution to the debate. Where was I? Ah yes, I was defining the various camps of anti-americans. Here is my next contribution.
Communists. What is a communist? A communist is a supporter of totalitarianism and so called followers of Marx. They justify their flawed and failed ideologies as being benificial for mankind. They are anti globalism, anti-capitalism, anti-religion, anti private industries and the list goes on. They support dictators, their ideologies have spawned dictators, their dictators are responsible for more deaths than the two world wars combined, and their dictators are corrupt as hell. Nowadays we no longer have communists so much as "pseudo-commies". Pseudo-commies are the younger generation, totally ignorant of history, and lacking in common sense. They have chosen to ignore the fact that whilst their dictators lived in luxury, the people under them toiled, suffered, and died of famine. Stalin was responsible for the death of 20 million of his own people, and Mao, 30 million. Che Guevara, a ruthless killer, is their icon...
Any wonder why they hate America? Tune in next time, when I can be arsed to go on. This is going to be one massive essay!
Glenn here.
Lydia asked me to post something regarding anti-Americanism about a month ago, and it's taken my lazy-ass this long to get around to doing it. Also, since that time, I started reading (and am currently about halfway through) Of Paradise and Power by Robert Kagan, a former U.S. State Department official during the 1980s.
Kagan's thesis basically boils down to this: While Europe has moved into a kind of Kantian, postmodern historical situation in which conflicts are believed to be solvable through talk and concessions, America remains mired in a world of harsh, Hobbesian realities where conflicts must sometimes be resolved violently. According to Kagan, the history behind Europe's transition to this rarified "place," this "castle" if you will, is very, very complicated, but what is clear is that America is left to defend the "walls" of this "castle" but never enter it. For if America enters as well, the whole special "place" beyond the bloody clutches of warfare that has been carved out for Europe to inhabit will become tenuous with no one left behind to defend it.
While I have a few minor quibbles with Kagan's book, on the whole I think it's excellent. Specifically, I think his aforementioned thesis is dead-on accurate, very insightful, and goes a long way toward explaining the notable differences that have arisen recently over matters of foreign policy between America and Europe (but, as Kagan also points out, these kinds of disagreements started to present themselves long before George W. Bush ever stepped into the White House). What I think ticks off many Americans isn't so much that France or Germany sometimes disagrees with us. Even the best of friends aren't always going to see eye-to-eye, and Americans understand that. What I think ticks off many Americans is the seeming lack of gratitude by France and Germany toward the U.S. government and the U.S. military after all that the U.S. has done and continues to do for Europe over the years (i.e. "manning the walls of the castle" and all that). Moreover, when France proclaims its desire to sell arms to a country like China, which is ruled by an expansionist-minded Communist regime, and acts as if America is being silly in objecting to such a plan, that ticks off Americans too -- because we know that if China were to use those weapons against Taiwan or one of China's other neighbors, it would fall upon us, not the French or the E.U., to rectify that situation militarily.
As to why France and other countries do such of things, I think part of it is self-interest (i.e. trying to make themselves at least look more strategically significant by throwing their weight around). But I also think it has to do with the fact that they know the U.S. is a benevolent giant; we're not going to invade Paris or Berlin and kick out their leaders because they (stupidly) sell weapons to strategic rivals. We'll needle them diplomatically, but that's about it. In short, they know they can get away with this kind of behavior.
As to why so many citizens of these and other countries don't think too highly of the U.S., I think some of that simply boils down to what late NBA player Wilt Chamberlain, who was for a long time the tallest man in the NBA, once said when asked in an interview why so many fans rooted against him: "Nobody roots for Goliath." In addition, many of the most powerful and influential news agencies in Europe are government-owned and operated, so they have a vested interest in deflecting attention away from whatever domestic problems may be occurring (some of which are attributable to the onerous socialist policies of many European governments) by fixating on the "Bad Ol' Warmongering Americans."
Lydia asked me to post something regarding anti-Americanism about a month ago, and it's taken my lazy-ass this long to get around to doing it. Also, since that time, I started reading (and am currently about halfway through) Of Paradise and Power by Robert Kagan, a former U.S. State Department official during the 1980s.
Kagan's thesis basically boils down to this: While Europe has moved into a kind of Kantian, postmodern historical situation in which conflicts are believed to be solvable through talk and concessions, America remains mired in a world of harsh, Hobbesian realities where conflicts must sometimes be resolved violently. According to Kagan, the history behind Europe's transition to this rarified "place," this "castle" if you will, is very, very complicated, but what is clear is that America is left to defend the "walls" of this "castle" but never enter it. For if America enters as well, the whole special "place" beyond the bloody clutches of warfare that has been carved out for Europe to inhabit will become tenuous with no one left behind to defend it.
While I have a few minor quibbles with Kagan's book, on the whole I think it's excellent. Specifically, I think his aforementioned thesis is dead-on accurate, very insightful, and goes a long way toward explaining the notable differences that have arisen recently over matters of foreign policy between America and Europe (but, as Kagan also points out, these kinds of disagreements started to present themselves long before George W. Bush ever stepped into the White House). What I think ticks off many Americans isn't so much that France or Germany sometimes disagrees with us. Even the best of friends aren't always going to see eye-to-eye, and Americans understand that. What I think ticks off many Americans is the seeming lack of gratitude by France and Germany toward the U.S. government and the U.S. military after all that the U.S. has done and continues to do for Europe over the years (i.e. "manning the walls of the castle" and all that). Moreover, when France proclaims its desire to sell arms to a country like China, which is ruled by an expansionist-minded Communist regime, and acts as if America is being silly in objecting to such a plan, that ticks off Americans too -- because we know that if China were to use those weapons against Taiwan or one of China's other neighbors, it would fall upon us, not the French or the E.U., to rectify that situation militarily.
As to why France and other countries do such of things, I think part of it is self-interest (i.e. trying to make themselves at least look more strategically significant by throwing their weight around). But I also think it has to do with the fact that they know the U.S. is a benevolent giant; we're not going to invade Paris or Berlin and kick out their leaders because they (stupidly) sell weapons to strategic rivals. We'll needle them diplomatically, but that's about it. In short, they know they can get away with this kind of behavior.
As to why so many citizens of these and other countries don't think too highly of the U.S., I think some of that simply boils down to what late NBA player Wilt Chamberlain, who was for a long time the tallest man in the NBA, once said when asked in an interview why so many fans rooted against him: "Nobody roots for Goliath." In addition, many of the most powerful and influential news agencies in Europe are government-owned and operated, so they have a vested interest in deflecting attention away from whatever domestic problems may be occurring (some of which are attributable to the onerous socialist policies of many European governments) by fixating on the "Bad Ol' Warmongering Americans."
Friday, May 13, 2005
find your element
at mutedfaith.com.
But...But I have issues with time!
What Type of Villain are You?
mutedfaith.com.
