Velocity Variable Quotes

R is a velocity of measure, defined as a reasonable speed of travel that is consistent with health, mental well-being, and not being more than, say, five minutes late. It is therefore clearly as almost infinite variable figure according to circumstances, since the first two factors vary not only with speed as an absolute, but also with awareness of the third factor. Unless handled with tranquility, this equation can result in considerable stress, ulcers, and even death.

R is a velocity measure, defined as a reasonable speed of travel that is consistent with health, mental well-being and not being more than, say, five minutes late. It is therefore clearly an almost infinitely variable figure according to circumstances, since the first two factors vary not only with speed taken as an absolute, but also with awareness of the third factor. Unless handled with tranquility this equation can result in considerable stress, ulcers and even death.

He might also interpret his experience thus: “My body of reference (the carriage) remains permanently at rest. With reference to it, however, there exists (during the period of application of the brakes) a gravitational field which is directed forwards and which is variable with respect to time. Under the influence of this field, the embankment together with the earth move non-uniformly in such a manner that their original velocity in the backward direction is continuously reduced.

She wanted to lunge for him then. In that moment Sheila wanted to charge her whole self into his body, pull out a tibia or a femur and squeeze its proteins to dust. She felt like she had more strength concentrated in every muscle than she'd ever had in her life, and her joints were shifting around inside of her , her cells were multiplying, like the real living organism she supposed she had been all long, but also - and this was the strange thing - she felt helpless, she felt drained of every available energy, like all of this velocity building in her was a product of what he had given her and what she had done with it. She remembered Mr. Zorn, her sophomore-year physics teacher, stepping back from the chalkboard in admiration of an equation he had just written, saying how beautiful it was, how perfectly and essentially balanced, and Sheila had rolled her eyes sitting at her desk at how pathetic this had sounded, how devoid of beauty Mr. Zorn's life must have truly been for him to even think to say something so insane, but now she felt the weight of this truth sting in her somewhere. She and Peter had built this, they had built it together - that's where the velocity came from, that's where the force of the thing came from - and to remove one of the variables from the equation was to leave it unbalanced, and she was not going to let this happen.

…Somehow I had assumed that the past stood still, in perfected effigies of itself, and that what we had once possessed remained our possession forever, and that at least the past, our past, our childhood, waited, always available, at the touch of a nerve, did not deteriorate like the untended house of an aging mother, but stood in pristine perfection, as in our remembrance. I see that this isn’t so, that memory decays like the rest, is unstable in its essence, flits, occludes, is variable, sidesteps, bleeds away, eludes all recovery; worse, is not that it seemed once, alters unfairly, is not the intact garden we remember but, instead, speeds away from us backward terrifically until when we pause to touch that sun-remembered wall the stones are friable, crack and soft down, and we could cry at the fierceness of that velocity if our astonished eyes had time.

Already uneasy over the foundations of their subject, mathematicians got a solid dose of ridicule from a clergyman, Bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753). Bishop Berkeley, in his caustic essay 'The Analyst, or a Discourse addressed to an Infidel Mathematician,' derided those mathematicians who were ever ready to criticize theology as being based upon unsubstantiated faith, yet who embraced the calculus in spite of its foundational weaknesses. Berkeley could not resist letting them have it: 'All these points [of mathematics], I say, are supposed and believed by certain rigorous exactors of evidence in religion, men who pretend to believe no further than they can see... But he who can digest a second or third fluxion, a second or third differential, need not, methinks, be squeamish about any point in divinity.' As if that were not devastating enough, Berkeley added the wonderfully barbed comment: 'And what are these fluxions? The velocities of evanescent increments. And what are these same evanescent increments? They are neither finite quantities, nor quantities infinitely small, not yet nothing. May we not call them the ghosts of departed quantities...?' Sadly, the foundations of the calculus had come to this - to 'ghosts of departed quantities.' One imagines hundreds of mathematicians squirming restlessly under this sarcastic phrase. Gradually the mathematical community had to address this vexing problem. Throughout much of the eighteenth century, they had simply been having too much success - and too much fun - in exploiting the calculus to stop and examine its underlying principles. But growing internal concerns, along with Berkeley's external sniping, left them little choice. The matter had to be resolved. Thus we find a string of gifted mathematicians working on the foundational questions. The process of refining the idea of 'limit' was an excruciating one, for the concept is inherently quite deep, requiring a precision of thought and an appreciation of the nature of the real number system that is by no means easy to come by. Gradually, though, mathematicians chipped away at this idea. By 1821, the Frenchman Augustin-Louis Cauchy (1789-1857) had proposed this definition: 'When the values successively attributed to a particular variable approach indefinitely a fixed value, so as to end by differing from it by as little as one wishes, this latter is called the limit of all the others.

Many accounts, for example Morici (2013) and Krugman (2013), indicate that an overwhelming majority of the economic gains generated in this Not-So-Great Recovery have gone to a very small percentage of the population.

In short: by imagining a space-filling fluid, and allowing for its possible effects, we are able to consider a wide variety of transformed images as representations of the same scene, viewed through different states of the fluid. In a similar way, by introducing just the right kind of material into space-time, Einstein was able to allow the distortions of physical law, which are introduced by Galilean transformations that vary in space and time, to be accomplished as modifications of a new material. That material is called the metric field or, as I prefer to say, metric fluid. The expanded system, containing the original world plus a hypothetical new material, obeys laws that remain the same even when we make variable changes in velocity, though the state of the metric fluid changes. In other words, the equations for the expanded system can support our huge, "outrageous" local symmetry. We might expect that systems of equations that support such an enormous amount of symmetry are very special, and hard to come by. The new material must have just the right properties. Equations with such enormous symmetry are the analogue of the Platonic solids-or, better, the spheres-among equations!

Changes in other factors such as changes in interest rates, changes in consumption plans, changes in businesses’ purchases of machinery, changes in government spending, changes in exchange rates, and changes in income taxes have their main impact (if not the sole impact) on aggregate demand.

In phase space the complete state of knowledge about a dynamical system at a single instant in time collapses to a point. That point is the dynamical system-at that instant. At the next instant, though, the system will have changed, ever so slightly and so the point moves. The history of the system time can be charted by the moving point, tracing its orbit through phase space with the passage of time. How can all the information about a complicated system be stored in a point? If the system has only two variables, the answer is simple. It is straight from the Cartesian geometry taught in high school-one variable on the horizontal axis, the other on the vertical. If the system is a swinging, frictionless pendulum, one variable is position and the other velocity, and they change continuously, making a line of points that traces a loop, repeating itself forever, around and around. The same system with a higher energy level-swinging faster and farther-forms a loop in phase space similar to the first, but larger. A little realism, in the form of friction, changes the picture. We do not need the equations of motion to know the density of a pendulum subject to friction. Every orbit must eventually end up at the same place, the center: position 0, velocity 0. This central fixed point "attracts" the orbits. Instead of looping around forever, they spiral inward. The friction dissipates the system's energy, and in phase space the dissipation shows itself as a pull toward the center, from the outer regions of high energy to the inner regions of low energy. The attractor-the simplest kind possible-is like a pinpoint magnet embedded in a rubber sheet.

Big data problems vary in how heavily they weigh in on the axes of volume, velocity and variability.

Information is widely used in physics, but appears to be very different from all the entities appearing in the physical descriptions of the world. It is not, for instance, an observable – such as the position or the velocity of a particle. Indeed, it has properties like no other variable or observable in fundamental physics: it behaves like an abstraction. For there are laws about information that refer directly to it, without ever mentioning the details of the physical substrates that instantiate it (this is the substrate-independence of information), and moreover it is interoperable – it can be copied from one medium to another without having its properties qua information changed. Yet information can exist only when physically instantiated; also, for example, the information-processing abilities of a computer depend on the underlying physical laws of motion, as we know from the quantum theory of computation. So, there are reasons to expect that the laws governing information, like those governing computation, are laws of physics. How can these apparently contradictory aspects of information be reconciled?