A few sample physics questions for Reiku

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'd question this. Without showing the work the eigenvector part is pretty much worthless, and the eigenvalue solution is definitely not flawless, either.

(Oh, and given your last post, I consider it very fitting that this is in the "Life" sub-section of the forum.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Call it a tantrum, call it fessing up to a lack of knowledge... either way, any more "professing proficiency" in physics from you can be taken as nothing more than a bare-toothed and utter LIE... don't expect anyone to fall for your tricks Reiku... and don't worry about your "reputation"... you've soiled that yourself just fine. It just amazes me that it came to all this drama and yet you STILL profess innocence and knowledge.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You feed hypocrites with bad presenting. Let me be explicit.

How you presented:

Here's an answer
I need more time
Here's another answer without showing you much work
I still need more time, stfu naysayers.
... blahblahblah

How you should have presented:

Here are all the answers, and all the work associated.

---

When you go to the publishers with your book, you have already failed if you bring the same presentation skills you use here.

You should focus more on presentation is what I'm saying. You've set yourself up to be 'the boy who cries wolf'.

 

Well, despite everything—does Reiku show any genuine affection for physics?

God, talk about eating your own.

 

And I've been saying it for years now- instead of wasting his time with all this quantum flapdoodle, he could have had at least a proper high school science education by now, maybe even a bit of undergrad. There are certain corners that simply can't be cut, not even by Gauss himself (indeed, Gauss never cut any corners whatsoever, he knew practically everything there was to know in his time).

 

It's funny how Reiku didn't even spot plane wave solutions yet he's arguing how he understands the Dirac equation, left and right moving plane waves and even their Fourier transforms. Here he posts about plane wave components for spinors and here explict actual plane wave solutions! Yet when he's required to do something with them, even recognise them, he can't do it.

Reiku, this is why the fact you can post equations doesn't mean its evidence you can do anything with them. If you didn't realise \(e^{i(\omega t - kx + c)} = \cos (\omega t - kx + c) + i \sin (\omega t - kx + c)\), they are plane wave solutions. In fact, the question James asked about them isn't even university level, knowing what the various terms in \(f(t) = A \sin (\omega t + \omega_{0})\) is A Level physics, I remember doing it. Working out string tensions is also A Level, both mathematics and physics.

And all of the plane wave stuff comes up in the definitions of quantum fields, yet you were trying to school James on the stuff.

In this thread not just me, not just the mathematicians/physicists, not just the moderators, but a wide variety of people have voiced how transparent your nonsense is. As James points out, if you're really spending 4 hours a day on this stuff then you're wasting 1/6 of your existence, never mind the time you spend writing your 'essays'. If you spent your time wisely you could know A Level physics and maths by now. It's not hard (not on the scale of things), some pretty thick friends of mine from comprehensive school managed to pass A Levels in them. Presently you're below that level of understanding. If you really want to understand physics, as indicated by the amount of time you're pumping into it, you need to change your approach and your general attitude. Else you'll squander the next 4 years like you have the last. This isn't an insult, it's an honest piece of advice.

 

I profess some knowledge.

In the end, alphanumeric said to me I would not be able to pass a first year university class. I beg to differ.

My point was to him, was that I would have been able to pass a unversity class if I started studying and moving up the same channels he once did. What I have said has been used against me in the thread, people taking that to mean I have some superior knowledge to everyone else. I don't - and I don't know why people say things like this.

So many here, AN and the likes, have often said I ''misrepresent'' my knowledge.

I don't need to, when I have so many here capable of doing that for me.

 

I did actually.

I simply asked a question, which no one replied to in the end.

I don't often see equations written in the style of the value taking over the ''variables'' involved. If that had been a geniune class, the equations would have been provided, such as, what would the frequencies value be.

 

You just demonstrated you couldn't. You couldn't do questions asked of A Level students. You couldn't even get into a university course if you couldn't do some of those, let along progress through the 1st year and pass it!

Regardless of whether this sound arrogant I'll say it, I'm certain you couldn't even get into my old university, never mind progress through it.

No, no one is taking it to mean that. Why are you misrepresenting people in the very thread where everyone is posting?

You claim to be able to pass undergraduate exams without having properly studied the material, it's all been self taught. The evidence is you couldn't. Thus your claims about your abilities/knowledge are false, demonstrably false

No, you just misrepresented us. You claim to have a particular level of knowledge which would allow you to pass particular exams/courses. You've been given many opportunities to demonstrate that, in fact the level of questions you've been asked are considerably lower than your self professed level. You've failed to justify your claims.

You couldn't pass an undergrad 1st year exam. You can't even do basic homework questions for A Level students. You certainly can't do material pertaining to the Dirac equation in anything close to a working level. And no, multiplying 2x2 matrices doesn't cut it, that's A Level again and even then you struggle to deal with them.

Reiku, it's daft to lie about yourself. It's even dafter to lie about what we are saying in the very thread we supposedly said it in! No one has said "Reiku believes himself superior in knowledge to everyone!". We're saying the level of knowledge/understanding/ability you claim you have is nowhere near where it actually is. It's considerably lower.

 

How would you know? I did afterall say, ''all the correct channels'' meaning I would not expect to go into university with out all the required teaching. My arguement to you, was simple from the start. I think you have been reading this to mean, that without any teaching I would still be able to pass. I don't think that at all.

I said to you that I would arguably swim through the first semester because I generally know quite a few things, this is why I mentioned the college test to you, it was done with only a few people who actually knew what they were doing, even after the students had been taught. I'd naturally soak in all the stuff, just as I would in uni.

 

''No, you just misrepresented us. You claim to have a particular level of knowledge which would allow you to pass particular exams/courses.''

Yeah, I said with the knowledge I have I would swim through the first semester. If I had any intentions meaning that to state that I do not require teaching, then you are gravely mistaken, afterall, if that was the case, why would I use a hypothetical example of an entire semester? I might as well just pass to the tests if I thought I was so knowledgable!

 

''You claim to be able to pass undergraduate exams without having properly studied the material, it's all been self taught. ''

I've never once said that. You have SAID THAT. I have never said this.

 

Where?

Where?

Nonsense. The question contains all the required information. You can compute the frequency from the question. What do you know of 'genuine' (or your version 'geniune'

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) classes anyway? Even at A Level you're expected to be able to handle the general expressions as well as cases where you have specific numbers. Besides, James got these either directly from or slightly tweaked actual exam questions, so saying "Oh a real class wouldn't have done it like that" is false. The question was easily answerable for someone competent at A Level physics, never mind someone who'd easily handle a 1st year undergrad exam as you claim you could.

The evidence is against you, you couldn't answer the question. Saying "No one answered my question about it" is a laughably bad excuse because if you were competent at this stuff you'd not need to ask any questions, you'd just do it. In fact that question is so simple you can do much of it without putting pen to paper, you can just read off some of the answers!

Your excuses might cut it with people who know nothing about physics/mathematics but numerous people in this thread, including James, know the relevant areas of physics/mathematics. You're not going to be able to lie your way out of it by somehow saying you weren't provided enough information or something wasn't clear. Any one of the physics/maths people here could sit down and go through the questions one after the other in very little time. You're claiming competency to at least mid-undergrad level, which is above all of those questions by quite some way. You have no excuse, you can only admit you couldn't do them.

Since everyone here knows that your continued lying only serves to highlight the issues Bells brought up. You've previously said you'll accept corrections, you don't mind that, and that you don't lie. By not saying "Yeah, I couldn't do them" you're contradicting yourself. Again.

 

''Regardless of whether this sound arrogant I'll say it, I'm certain you couldn't even get into my old university, never mind progress through it.''

And never once have I stated I wanted in your university. You have SAID THAT, I have never said that.

 

Well I never wrote it, I was waiting for someone to answer my question.

 

Why?

When James posted these questions, I had been extremely buisy. It just so happens James said, take your time, in fact, as long as I wanted. So why is presenting work in pieces such a crime, especially if James had every intention replying to each part seperately?

 

I know, I was being obtuse.

 

And trippy, just because K is a constant, anything with an equal sign is an equation.

 

My point of mentioning F=Mg is because

F/M = g

g is still a constant, but F/M = g is still an equation.