text:
# Is $f(x)=x+\sin(x)$ a one to one or many to one function?

If we differentiate the function, we get $$f'(x)=1+\cos(x)$$ Hence, $f'(x)$ varies from $0$ to $2$.

So, I think it is a one to one function because the function is never decreasing, and the function never becomes consecutively constant for more than one point.

But how do I prove that $f(x)$ is never strictly $0$ in an interval?

• Can someone help me with the use of Latex? May 11, 2017 at 6:43
• More precisely, the zeoes of the derivative are a closed discrete set. May 11, 2017 at 6:51
• – dxiv
May 11, 2017 at 6:54

I'm assuming you meant:

How do I prove that there is no interval of non-zero measure where $f'(x) = 0$ across the whole interval?

As you say, $f'(x) = 1 + \cos(x)$. The simplest solution is to find all the places that $f'(x) = 0$ and show it's a set of isolated points.

$$1 + \cos(x) = 0 \\ \cos(x) = -1 \\ x \in \{(2z+1)\pi \space | \space z \in \mathbb{Z} \}$$

Clearly no subset of this solution set will form an interval (if you want to be really thorough, you can prove it by showing that any two distinct elements are at least $2\pi$ apart from one another).

Assume $f(a)=f(b)$ with $a<b$. We know from the Intermediate Value Theorem that $f(b)-f(a)=(b-a)f'(c)$ for some $c\in(a,b)$. With $f'\ge 0$, this only tells us that $f(b)\ge f(a)$. But we know that $f'$ does not vanish on whole intervals, in particular, for sufficiently small $h$, we will have $f'(x)\ne 0$ for all $x\in(a,a+h)$ (even in the case that $f'(a)=0$). Then the argument of above gives us $f(b)- f(a+h)\ge 0$ (as we may pick $h\le b-a$) and $f(a+h)-f(a)=hf'(c)$ with $c\in (a,a+h)$, but this time we know $f'(c)>0$ and thus $$f(b)\ge f(a+h)>f(a).$$

• I think OP wants a rigorous proof of your statement "we know that $f'$ does not vanish on whole intervals". This seems pretty obvious, but I think that's the crux of OP's question. May 11, 2017 at 6:52
• @Airdish has got it right. May 11, 2017 at 7:07
• Added it to my question. May 11, 2017 at 7:09
• that lemma you stated is the Mean Value Theorem , not the Intermediate Value Theorem May 12, 2017 at 10:33

A direct way:

Let

$$x+\sin x=y+\sin y$$ with $x\ne y$.

Then using the sum-to-product formula $$x-y+\sin x-\sin y=0,$$

$$x-y+2\cos\frac{x+y}2\sin\frac{x-y}2=0,$$

$$\cos\frac{x+y}2\frac{\sin\dfrac{x-y}2}{\dfrac{x-y}2}=\cos\frac{x+y}2\text{ sinc }\dfrac{x-y}2=-1.$$

The function on the right is the cardinal sine, which is less than $1$ for a nonzero argument, so that reaching $-1$ is impossible and the function is one-to-one.

• This is unreadable without parentheses... May 11, 2017 at 7:19
• @NajibIdrissi: I though so too in the past but I have changed my mind. I have now switched to a different style, where the argument of the function is the atomic expression that follows. This is actually very common. If the argument isn't atomic, then I add parenthesis.
– user65203
May 11, 2017 at 7:22

Yes, you're right: since $f'(x)\geq 0$, it's continuous and doesn't stay at $0$ for any interval, the function is strictly increasing and so injective.

We can see this by writing $f(b)-f(a)=\int_a^bf'(x)\mathrm dx$ (where $b>a$). If $f'(x)>0$ in $[a,b]$ then (because the derivative is continuous) it has some minimum value $\delta>0$ in that interval, and you get $f(b)-f(a)>\delta(b-a)>0$.

If $f'(x)=0$ somewhere on that interval, just pick any $c,d$ with $a<c<d<b$ such that $f'(x)>0$ on $[c,d]$. Splitting up into three integrals you get $f(a)\leq f(c)<f(d)\leq f(b)$, so $f(a)<f(b)$.

• Please explain how it is strictly increasing if it equals zero at a point. May 11, 2017 at 6:57
• If you have $a$ and $b$ either side of a point at which it is zero, you can choose some $c,d$ with $a<c<d<b$ so that there are no zeroes in $[a,c]$ or $[d,b]$. Then you can say it is strictly increasing between $a$ and $c$, and between $d$ and $b$, and it certainly doesn't decrease in the middle, so it is strictly larger at $b$ than $a$. May 11, 2017 at 7:10
• @yashswaraj: yes, it is, but only because it equals zero at exactly one point. Roughly speaking, strictly increasing means that if $a > b$, then $f(a) > f(b)$. Let $c$ be the point at which $f'(c) = 0$. Then apply MVT between $f(c)$ and $f(c+h)$ for any $h > 0$ to see that $f(c + h) > f(c)$, implying that it is strictly increasing May 11, 2017 at 7:20

$f(x)$ is continuous, $f'(x)\geq 0$ and it is never strictly equal to zero for any interval,So it's one-one! Yes you are right!

Formally writing it now: Say it's not one-one so say $x\neq y$ but $f(x)=f(y)$.

w.l.o.g assume $x<y$

Since $f'(x)$ is zero at only discrete points then there is an interval contained in the interval $(x,y)$ in which $f'(x)$ is strictly greater than zero, so $f(x)$ strictly increases in that interval, also we know $f(x)$ never decreases, hence $f(x)$ is of course greater than $f(y)$ as $x<y$, hence a contradiction.

• Please recheck your answer for latex errors. I can't understand what you are trying to convey. May 11, 2017 at 6:38
• f′(x)≥0 and it never equals zero for any interval,So it's one-one! That's pretty much what the OP wrote in the question. An answer would be expected to back that up with some proof, or at least a hint thereof.
– dxiv
May 11, 2017 at 6:40
• are you kidding me? $1+\cos x$ is never zero for any interval of $x$? how about trying $x=\pi$ May 11, 2017 at 6:46
• @TheDeadLegend x=π is not an interval. It's a point. May 11, 2017 at 6:48
• @YashSwaraj saying that $f'(x)$ is zero at least once in $[\pi, 2\pi]$ . Will that suffice? May 11, 2017 at 6:49


text:
# Calculating the divergence of a vector field using non-cubic volumes

The divergence of a vector field is defined is formally defined as:

$\operatorname{div}\,\mathbf{F}(p) = \lim_{V \rightarrow \{p\}} \iint_{S(V)} {\mathbf{F}\cdot\mathbf{n} \over |V| } \; dS$

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergence#Definition_of_divergence

Then by carrying out the integration over a box and taking the limit as the size of the box approach zero, we reach the well-known formula for calculating the divergence:

$\operatorname{div}\,\mathbf{F} = \nabla\cdot\mathbf{F} =\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} +\frac{\partial V}{\partial y} +\frac{\partial W}{\partial z }$

Now my question is, is there any formal proof that whatever volume we use, we get the same formula?

-

As far as I know, there is only a really good elementary proof for shapes like cubes, spheres, or polyhedra. Proving this for general regions requires a bit more work.

The simplest way to prove the statement you are asking in the general case is to first prove Gauss's Divergence Theorem. Then for any volume $V$ (with piecewise-smooth boundary), we have $$\int\!\!\!\!\int_{S(V)} (\textbf{F}\cdot\textbf{n})\,dS \;=\; \int\!\!\!\!\int\!\!\!\!\int_V (\mathrm{div}\;\textbf{F})\,dV$$ As $V$ shrinks toward the point $p$, the integral on the right approaches $\mathrm{div}\;\textbf{F}(p)$ multiplied by the volume of $V$. We can make this precise using the following lemma:

Lemma. Let $f\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}$ be a continuous function, and let $p\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Then for every $\epsilon>0$, there exists a $\delta>0$ with the following property: if $V$ is a region in $\mathbb{R}^n$ with positive volume and $V$ lies entirely within a distance $\delta$ of the point $p$, then $$\left|f(p) - \frac{1}{\mathrm{vol}(V)}\int\!\!\!\!\int\!\!\!\!\int_V f\,dV\right| < \epsilon.$$ Proof: Let $\epsilon>0$. Since $f$ is continuous, there exists a $\delta > 0$ so that $$\|x-p\|<\delta \qquad\Rightarrow\qquad |f(x)-f(p)|<\epsilon$$ for all $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $V$ be a region in $\mathbb{R}^n$, and suppose that $V$ lies entirely within $\delta$ of the point $p$. Then $f(p) - \epsilon < f(x) < f(p)+\epsilon$ for all $x\in V$, so $$[f(p) - \epsilon]\,\mathrm{vol}(V) \;\leq\; \int\!\!\!\!\int\!\!\!\!\int_V f\,dV \;\leq\; [f(p) + \epsilon]\,\mathrm{vol}(V)$$ and the result follows.$\qquad\square$

Using this theorem and Gauss's Divergence Theorem, we immediately get:

Theorem. Let $\textbf{F}\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$ be a continuously differentiable vector field, and let $p\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Then for every $\epsilon>0$, there exists a $\delta>0$ with the following property: if $V$ is a region in $\mathbb{R}^n$ with positive volume and a piecewise-smooth boundary and $V$ lies entirely within a distance $\delta$ of the point $p$, then $$\left|\mathrm{div}\;\textbf{F}(p) - \frac{1}{\mathrm{vol}(V)}\int\!\!\!\!\int_{S(V)} (\textbf{F}\cdot\textbf{n})\,dS\right| < \epsilon.\tag*{\square}$$

It is possible to restate this theorem using sequences and limits. For the following theorem, if $V$ is a region in $\mathbb{R}^n$, define $$\mathrm{rad}(V,p) \;=\; \sup\{\|x-p\| \mid x\in V\}.$$ That is, $\mathrm{rad}(V,p)$ is the radius of the smallest sphere centered at $p$ that contains $V$. Then

Theorem. Let $\textbf{F}\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$ be a continuously differentiable vector field, and let $p\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $V_1,V_2,V_3,\ldots$ be a sequence of regions in $\mathbb{R}^n$, all with positive volume and piecewise-smooth boundary, and suppose that $$\lim_{n\to\infty} \mathrm{rad}(V,p) \;=\; 0.$$ Then $$\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{\mathrm{vol}(V_n)}\int\!\!\!\!\int_{S(V_n)} (\textbf{F}\cdot\textbf{n})\,dS \;=\; \mathrm{div}\;\textbf{F}(p).\tag*{\square}$$

-
Thanks for the answer, and for the time you spent writing it :-) – Rafid May 22 '12 at 5:26

format: plain


text:
# CXC CSEC FINAL exam timetable - May/June 2010

CXC CSEC FINAL exam timetable May/June 2010

 CARIBBEAN EXAMINATIONS COUNCIL Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) Examinations FINAL Exam Timetable May-June 2010
 Symbol key * A 15-minute break must be allowed between Papers *** For PRIVATE candidates only. NOT for candidates registered in schools and recognised educational institutions. # Combined Question Paper/Answer Booklet ## A 10-minute break must be allowed between Section I, and Sections II and III (Music Paper 1) ** Common Paper
 Date Morning Afternoon Fri 16th April VISUAL ARTS Paper 2 (General) Question paper handed to candidates for Examinations beginning week of May 03 (see note 4) Mon 26th April PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORT 2 (General) PRACTICAL EXAMINATIONS Examinations to begin (See Note 7) Mon 3rd May VISUAL ARTS Paper 2 (General) Examinations to begin (See Note 4) MUSIC 2 (General) PRACTICAL EXAMINATIONS Examinations to begin (see Note 8) Tues 4th May ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT PREPARATION & MGT 2 General - 2 hr 20 min Wed 5th May MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY 2 Technical – 2 hr 40 min CLOTHING & TEXTILES 2 General – 2 hr 10 min Thurs 6th May TECHNICAL DRAWING 3 General – 3 hr 10 min Fri 7th May AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE D/A 1** AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE S/A 1** General – 1 hr 15 min MUSIC PAPER 1 Section 1 # General – 1 hr ## MUSIC PAPER 1 Sections II and III # General – 1 hr 15 min MUSIC 2 General PRACTICAL EXAMINATIONS Examinations to end HUMAN AND SOCIAL BIOLOGY 2 # General – 2 hr Date Morning Afternoon Mon 10th May AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE D/A 2#** AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE S/A 2#** General – 2 hr THEATRE ARTS 1 General – 1 hr 40 min ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY 1 Technical – 1 hr 15 min FOOD & NUTRITION 2 General – 2 hr 10 min Tues 11th May HOME ECONOMICS: MANAGEMENT 2 General – 2 hr 10 min TECHNICAL DRAWING 2 General – 1 hr 40 min ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY 2 Technical – 2 hr 40 min Wed 12th May ENGLISH B 2 General – 2 hr 10 min VISUAL ARTS 2 General Examinations to end ENGLISH B 1 General – 1 hr 45 min Thurs 13th May INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2 General – 2 hr 15 min FRENCH 2 General – 2 hr 15 min Fri 14th May PHYSICS 2# General – 2 hr 30 min INTEGRATED SCIENCE SA 2 # General – 2 hr Date Morning Afternoon Mon 17th May PRINCIPLES OF ACCOUNTS 2 General – 3 hr PRINCIPLES OF ACCOUNTS 1 General – 1 hr 30 min * PRINCIPLES OF ACCOUNTS 3/2*** General – 1 hr 30 min Tues 18th May ENGLISH A 2 General – 2 hr 40 min ENGLISH A 1 General – 1 hr 30 min Wed 19th May MATHEMATICS 2 General – 2 hr 40 min MATHEMATICS 1 General – 1 hr 30 min Thurs 20th May SPANISH 2 General – 2 hr 15 min BUILDING TECHNOLOGY: CONSTRUCTION 2 Technical – 2 hr 40 min BUILDING TECHNOLOGY: WOODS 2 Technical – 2 hr 40 min Fri 21nd May CARIBBEAN HISTORY 2 General – 2 hr 10 min PHYSICAL EDUCATION & SPORT 1 General - 2 hr 40 min Date Morning Afternoon Mon 24th May RELIGIOUS EDUCATION 2 General - 2 hr RELIGIOUS EDUCATION 1 General - 1hr 15 min Tues 25th May OFFICE ADMINISTRATION 2 General – 2 hr OFFICE ADMINISTRATION 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * OFFICE ADMINISTRATION 3/2*** # General – 1 hr 45 min Wed 26th May BIOLOGY 2# General – 2 hr 30 min GEOGRAPHY 2 General – 2 hr 30 min Thurs 27th May PRINCIPLES OF BUSINESS 2 General – 2 hr PRINCIPLES OF BUSINESS 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * PRINCIPLES OF BUSINESS 3/2*** # General – 1 hr 15 min Fri 28th May SOCIAL STUDIES 2 General – 2 hr 40 min SOCIAL STUDIES 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * SOCIAL STUDIES 3/2*** # General – 1 hr 10 min Date Morning Afternoon Mon 31st May CHEMISTRY 2 # General – 2 hr 30 min FRENCH 1 General – 1 hr 15 min Tues 1st June INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1 General – 1 hr 30 min AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE D/A 3 General – 2hr Wed 2nd June ECONOMICS 2 General – 2 hr ECONOMICS 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * ECONOMICS 3/2 ***# General – 1 hr 30 min Thurs 3th June PHYSICS 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * PHYSICS 3/2*** General – 2 hr 10 min CARIBBEAN HISTORY 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * CARIBBEAN HISTORY 3/2*** General – 2 hr Fri 4th June ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT PREPARATION & MGT 1 General – 1 hr * ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT PREPARATION & MGT 3/2 *** General – 1 hr 50 min CHEMISTRY 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * CHEMISTRY 3/2*** General – 2 hr 10 min Date Morning Afternoon Mon 7th June INTEGRATED SCIENCE SA 3/2***# General – 2 hr 30 min CLOTHING & TEXTILES 1 General – 1 hr 15 min BIOLOGY 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * BIOLOGY 3/2*** General – 2 hr 10 min Tues 8th June SPANISH 1 General – 1 hr 15 min GEOGRAPHY 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * GEOGRAPHY 3/2*** # General – 1 hr 30 min Wed 9th June INTEGRATED SCIENCE SA 1 General – 1 hr 15 min TECHNICAL DRAWING 1 General – 1 hr 15 min Thurs 10th June HUMAN AND SOCIAL BIOLOGY 1 General – 1 hr 15 min HOME ECONOMICS: MANAGEMENT 1 General – 1 hr 15 min MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY 1 Technical – 1 hr 15 min Fri 11th June BUILDING TECHNOLOGY: CONSTRUCTION 1 Technical – 1 hr 15 min BUILDING TECHNOLOGY: WOODS 1 Technical – 1 hr 15 min FOOD & NUTRITION 1 General – 1 hr 15 min * A 15-minute break must be allowed between Papers ** Common Paper # Combined Question Paper/Answer Booklet ## A 10-minute break must be allowed between Section I, and Sections II and III (Music Paper 1) *** For PRIVATE Candidates only NOT for candidates registered in schools and recognised educational institutions. Key to the CXC CSEC exam timetable May/June 2010 Additional notes to the CXC CSEC exam timetable May/June 2010

Fivestar

tami chan (not verified) 4 November 2009 - 9:12am

### maths

i need help

guest (not verified) 4 November 2009 - 10:43am

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

when is the AS MATHS exam ?

### AS math exam

Hi, sorry, we don't support the AS math exam in this community. We focus on the CXC math exam only.

lillyfield05 (not verified) 4 December 2009 - 7:39pm

In reply to by Kathy-ann Daniel

### hi

i am sitting maths, eng and pob may2010. i am way behind can u help?

Neffie (not verified) 4 November 2009 - 2:15pm

### maths

i need help 2!!

rasheeda brown (not verified) 5 November 2009 - 2:54pm

### live it love

good job u guys are doing

krissy101111 (not verified) 9 November 2009 - 7:55pm

### yoo

woiiii class of 2010...this year go mawdd!! big up all st.joseph's convent girl, st george's grenada we gonna mash up the place!!....determination is the key...hey big up to all yall schools in the caribbean lets do this:)

Yanks121 (not verified) 10 November 2009 - 10:49pm

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

big up all learners center students taking cxc in 2010 a tex we a go tex it, good luck to all schools and studying is the key study hard trust me it will payoff.

steve16 (not verified) 19 November 2009 - 9:40am

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

me too

Riaz Mohammed (not verified) 3 December 2009 - 8:06am

### cxc

yow people i am so freaking scared of this exam. I might pass out in the exam room i sure. I am so damn scared cause this is my life here and uhh well my mind usually go blank in a exam room. Help!!!!!!

nicoleta (not verified) 4 December 2009 - 8:41am

### gd lk

wishing u all success in ur exams merry christmas and a happy new year.

guest (not verified) 4 December 2009 - 11:06am

### english

am having difficult in getting my english right i need help before this monster ate me

Guest4141 (not verified) 17 December 2009 - 4:33pm

### Studying

Does anyone have an idea of how to go about studying for cxc, When to start, and what study habits you should take. As well as how long you should stufy forr and when should breaks be taken and for how long

Kathy-ann Daniel 17 December 2009 - 7:25pm

In reply to by Guest4141 (not verified)

### Re: studying

You might want to check in the caribexams wiki. There is information on how to study for exams there e.g. how to set up a timetable and how much time to study each subject per day etc.

Donnicka James (not verified) 18 December 2009 - 1:02pm

In reply to by Guest4141 (not verified)

### Re: Studying

when studying for CXC from your timetable, study from the top to the middle of your timetable, then from the bottom back up to the middle. I was advised to do atleast 2 hrs in studies and i have the habit of studing in the night and then getting up at 2:00 am to study for 1 hr. it's not that hard.

Shawna-kay Harvey (not verified) 4 January 2010 - 7:39pm

### math and spanish and also the programming part of I.T

i need serious help!!! please people plz!!!!

whitz1993 (not verified) 4 January 2010 - 9:10pm

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

POA gives me alot of trouble.. i'm having problems studying for it... any advice???

### POA giving me a lot of trouble...

I pass POA i get grade 2 let me tell you something, you cannot study it you will have to practice the only thing you can study is the answer to multiple choices

5 January 2010 - 10:33pm

### chemistry

i have some problems with chemistry do you mind changing the date please god will bless you.

### Re: chemistry

chemistry is in deed a difficult subject, providing that you have text books and you make proper use of them you will find that you will begin to benefit from what youve learnt from the books sowly but surely. Are you prepared to take your time and make learning about chemistry a success?

redz (not verified) 6 January 2010 - 11:18am

### Cxc

Heys guys, I just wanna say a few words of encouragement, study really hard now for cxc exams and trust me it will pay off its not forever and remember that after exams are through u have nothing to worry about for the rest of june and that feeling is great to have no educational obligations...it feels good man...lol...thank you...and go study now!!!!!!!!

guest (not verified) 6 January 2010 - 10:09pm

In reply to by redz (not verified)

### That helps

Helps to hear that...can't wait to have that feeling after cxc is finished :)
thanks for the encouraging words

kamtash (not verified) 25 January 2010 - 1:37pm

In reply to by redz (not verified)

### Re: Cxc

I like so need help with math and chemistry. I don't want to fail

Concerned Student (not verified) 7 January 2010 - 7:52pm

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

Why is visual arts and both english B papers on the same day? It makes no sense visual arts is a six hour exam and english is whole day. What are students going to do?

guest (not verified) 8 January 2010 - 12:40am

### Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

i like this timetable... i think it places less stress on science students :) sorry 2 those who have a problem with it. GOOD LUCK 2 ER BDY N HOPE YALL MAKE UR TEACHERS PROUD.

### Re: Re: CXC CSEC timetable for May-June 2010 exams

i have to agree with you i love this time table

all705 (not verified) 9 January 2010 - 9:02am

### unfair

i think it is unfair to the business students...there is not enough time in between our exams...i am sorry but i do not support it...because the science, technical, general and arts students exams are further spaced.

Kadie123 (not verified) 9 January 2010 - 6:46pm

### OMG

They must change some things...Howcan u have Spanish and Geo on the same day and then have History right after?...are u joking...that's a lot of reading and practice...and when is the spanish orals exam?...

concerned guest (not verified) 10 January 2010 - 9:17am

### sciences, literature, information technology and spanish

i do not like this time table...........i think that some of the subjects should be shuffled around because a lot of people right now have hard exam back to back while i am positive that a few have clashes....

with this time table i have Literature then Information Technology then Physics
OMG people that is a lot of reading.....

anyways i just wanted to find out when is Spanish Orals?????????


text:
# Choosing the weights of a Voronoi diagram — is this function always the gradient of another function?

This question is related to the earlier question Weighted area of a Voronoi cell . As in that question, let $X = \{ x_1,\dots,x_n\}$ denote a set of $n$ points in the unit square $S = [0,1]\times[0,1]$, and let $w = \{w_1,\dots,w_n\}$ denote a set of weights corresponding to the $n$ points in $X$. Define the "power diagram" of $X$ in $S$ to be a partition of $S$ into at most $n$ pieces $V_i(\mathbf{w})$, where

$V_i(\mathbf{w}) = \{x\in S: \|x - x_i\|^2 + w_i \leq \|x - x_j\|^2 + w_j \forall j \neq i \}$

i.e. a "weighted Voronoi diagram". Thus, larger values of $w_i$ correspond to smaller cells $V_i$. The cells are always convex, and the partition does not change if we add a constant to all terms of a weight vector $\mathbf{w}$.

My question is: let's consider some quantity $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ associated with the Voronoi cells with the following monotonicity property: for any two weight vectors $\mathbf{w}$ and $\mathbf{w}'$, if it turns out that $V_i(\mathbf{w})\subsetneq V_i(\mathbf{w}')$, then $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w})) < Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}'))$. Examples of $Q$ would be the area, perimeter, diameter, or width of the cells. I want to know: is it always the case that $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ is somehow "equivalent" to the gradient of some other function?

My reasoning for this question is as follows: let's say we want to select weights $\mathbf{w}$ such that $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ is equal for all $i$. This means that we want to increase(resp. decrease) values of $w_i$ for those regions where $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ is large (resp. small). A sensible way to do this would be to iteratively set $w_i \mapsto w_i + \epsilon Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$, where $\epsilon$ is some tiny stepsize. I have tried numerical experiments with this scheme for the case where $Q$ measures area or perimeter and this seems to work.

Looking at the last paragraph of your question, it might seem reasonable to reformulate the question as: can we always select weights $\mathbf{w}$, such that the values $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ satisfy prescribed ratios: if we normalize by the sum of all entries $$s(\mathbf{w}):=\sum_{i=1}^nQ(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$$ we get a vector $$Q_{\text{norm}}(\mathbf{w}):=\frac{1}{s(\mathbf{w})}(Q(V_i(\mathbf{w})))_{1\leq i\leq n}$$ which is contained in the simplex $\Delta_{n-1}=\{(x_i)_{1\leq i\leq n}|\sum_i=1\}$. Then the question is: can we find for every point $p\in\Delta_{n-1}$ weights $\mathbf{w}$ such that $Q_{\text{norm}}=p$. For example if we take $p$ to be the barycenter of $\Delta_{n-1}$, then we would want to select weights such that $Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ are equal for all $i$.

I can answer this question completely under the additional assumption that $Q$ is continuous. (Your examples "area, perimeter, diameter, or width of the cells" are all continous). What we need to prove is the surjectivity of the continous map $$Q_{\text{norm}}\colon\, \mathbb{R}^n\to \Delta_{n-1}.$$ We consider a map \begin{align}f\colon\, \Delta_{n-1}&\to\mathbb{R}^n\\x=(x_1,\dots,x_n)&\mapsto f(x)=(\log(x_1),\dots,\log(x_n)).\end{align} This is only defined on the interior of $\Delta_{n-1}$, but we extend the definition on the boundary $\partial\Delta_{n-1}$ by setting $\log(0)=-\infty$. Also we extend the definition of the Voronoi diagram to allow some (but not all) components of the weight vector to be $-\infty$; the coresponding Voronoi regions will be empty. These definitions then allow us to compose $f$ with $Q_{\text{norm}}$ to get the map $$Q_{\text{norm}}\circ f\colon\, \Delta_{n-1}\to\Delta_{n-1},$$ which is continous and has the nice properties to map faces to faces: If some coordinates of $x$ are zero, the corresponding coordinates in $f(x)$ are $-\infty$ and the corresponding coordinates in $Q_{\text{norm}}\circ f(x)$ are also zero, since the corresponding Voronoi regions are empty. Therefore a face of $\Delta_{n−1}$ is mapped to itself.

Then we can apply a little (but often useful) lemma from algebraic topology that just states that such a map must be surjective. See for this question (an the answers): Map from simplex to itself that preserves sub-simplices. Hence $Q_{\text{norm}}\circ f$ is surjective and therefore also $Q_{\text{norm}}$ is surjective, which is what we wanted to show.

Edit: If $Q$ is taken to be the area and you are looking for an all equal area partition, then this partition is even unique up to sets of measure zero. A nice proof of this geometrical proof is given in the following paper, where they also consider some generalizations of the question:

Darius Geiß, Rolf Klein, Rainer Penninger, and Günter Rote, Optimally solving a transportation problem using Voronoi diagrams, Computational Geometry, Theory and Applications 46 (2013), 1009–1016, special issue for the 28th European Workshop on Computational Geometry (EuroCG'12).

(It is not the first proof of this results, see the references of this paper.)

• Hey thanks! That argument is very helpful. I'll be curious to see if I can apply this kind of reasoning to show that the map $w_i \mapsto w_i + \epsilon Q(V_i(\mathbf{w}))$ converges. – Tom Solberg Feb 23 '16 at 19:08
• @TomSolberg I find it quite plausible that this should converge. – Moritz Firsching Feb 23 '16 at 19:45


text:
For someone who has a delta hedged options position, the $$\Gamma:= \frac{\partial^2V}{\partial S^2}$$ roughly quantifies the amount of money made or lost if $$\frac{1}{\Delta t}\frac{(\Delta S)^2}{S^2} \neq \sigma^2$$ where $$\sigma$$ is the number that characterizes the process: $$dS_t = S_t(\mu dt + \sigma dW_t)$$ If we consider the quantity on the left-hand side to be the "realized-variance" of our trajectory, gamma can be interpreted as the Greek that measures the impact of the difference between realized-variance and implied-variance/model-variance on our option price, assuming our portfolio is delta hedged. Thus, in my opinion, $$\Gamma$$ can (in a very precise sense) be considered the "realized volatility greek".

I have the following question then:

1. What, fundamentally is $$\nu$$? I understand it is defined as $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial \sigma}$$, so that it quantifies changes in option prices given our inputted variance/volatility. However, many consider it to be the sensitivity of option price to "implied volatility". This makes little sense to me - implied volatility is computed using option prices in the first place, so it makes little sense to have a greek like this, if changes in implied volatility are a posteriori computed from changes in option prices.
2. How does $$\theta$$ figure into the calculations of delta-hedged PnL?

Thanks in advance for the assitance.

• You should have a look at Lorenzo Bergomi's book "stochastic volatility modeling". Think of the vega as the sensitity of your (possibly exotic) option to vanilla options, the latter being quoted in terms of implied volatility rather than in price. Dec 3 '20 at 14:44

Gamma is the change in price due to realized volatility--in other words due to the fact that the underlying has moved. For a Delta hedged position, this will be a measure of how much your PnL was off due to a move in the underlying. As options prices that have any time left are not linear with respect to the move in the underlying, your delta will change as the underlying changes and hence your delta hedge will be off as the underlying moves. Gamma will approximate how much your hedge will be off.

Vega is the change in the price of volatility or the change in the implied volatility of options prices. This will be a measure of the PnL strictly due to the fact that the price of volatility has changed (the underlying has not changed in value).

Theta will measure the amount of PnL due to the passage of time. If you are long options, if nothing else has moved (implied vol or the underlying), the option will lose value as time passes (except really far out of the money options). Theta typically measures how much the option value will lose from the passage of a day for long options holders (or a gain for option writers).

many consider it to be the sensitivity of option price to "implied volatility"

This may just be a semantic issue- it's the sensitivity to volatility, regardless of how that volatility is computed. Since the volatility in the black-scholes model is a forward-looking volatility, there's no observable way to measure it other than implying it from market prices. But suppose the market is wrong and is overpricing options? Meaning that the actual forward volatility is lower? Then vega tells you how sensitive the option value is to changes in that volatility factor.

Or, put another way, if you look at changes in market prices (and volatilities) from one day to another, vega will tell you how much of the change in market price was due to the change in volatility (ignoring any second-order and higher effects due to vol skew, etc.)

• Have you ever written code to compute implied vol? It is usually done iteratively, starting from an initial guess. At each step you adjust the current vol up or down to try to match the market price of the option. How much should you adjust the Vol? One good method is to adjust vol by the current pricing error divided by the current Vega. It works because "Vega tells you how sensitive the option value is to changes in that volatility parameter". That's what Vega is. Dec 3 '20 at 2:08
• @noob2 So Vega's usefulness comes from Newton's method? Dec 3 '20 at 4:14
• To a programmer, and to Isaac Newton, the answer is yes ;) Dec 3 '20 at 13:38
• Well, that's not the only way Vega is useful, but yes, it can help you find implied vol in fewer iterations. But it's by no means the only or even the most valuable use of Vega. Dec 3 '20 at 14:13

You need to think of the option price as a function of 3 variables $$C=C(t,S,\sigma)$$. For a listed option the price is known from the market, and $$\sigma$$ is the only unknown.

• Write down the Taylor series expansion in those 3 variables, including second order for spot and the spot/vol cross term. Include the theta!
• At times $$t_1, t_2$$ you will see 2 option prices in the market and 2 spot prices, so you have sets $$(t_1, S_1, C_1),(t_2, S_2, C_2)$$.
• You can convert these option prices to implied vols, and calculate the option Greeks
• You can input the Greeks and the data changes $$S_2-S_1,\sigma_2-\sigma_1$$ and see how much of the price move from $$C_1$$ to $$C_2$$ you can explain. That should clarify for you what the implied volatility (and theta) is for.

The real utility of this process comes when you are modelling more than one option in a portfolio. The time and spot move are shared by all option Taylor series, and the various implied volatility moves become what you study to understand (and control) the total moves in portfolio value.

OK,

many consider it to be the sensitivity of option price to "implied volatility". This makes little sense to me - implied volatility is computed using option prices in the first place, so it makes little sense to have a greek like this, if changes in implied volatility are a posteriori computed from changes in option prices.

Let's consider a simpler instrument. Suppose you have some corporate bonds in multiple currencies. Assume the FX rates and bond prices are observable. It is good to have a P&L explain that tells you how much of your P&L came from FX rate changes, how much from passage of time (pull to par etc), how much from the change in the risk-free interest rates in various currencies, how much from the various credits, how much from the idiosyncratic moves of indovodual bonds...

Now suppose you have an option whose price is observable in the market (not marked to model). Before Black-Scholes, traders did not have a good way to explain why option prices changed or what their views were. Today, we can get the implied vol from option price and, for example, we can see the book's sensitivity to impled vol; we can decide whether we are comfortable with this sensitivity, or we want to change it (by unwinding some positions or adding some hedges). We can explain the change in the option's price by attributing it to the passage of time, the changes in the price of the underlying and the interest rates, and the changes in the implied vol. Although the quotes often are the impled vols, still the implied vols are not as directly observable like the time, the interest rates, and the underlying price. Just think of it as the part that leaves no unexplained P&L.


text:
[texhax] determine remaining space

Wed Sep 7 17:46:03 CEST 2005

On Sep 7, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Florian Knorn wrote:

> could anybody plz tell me a macro that returns the remaing space in the
> current text line ? like \remainingspace would contain the length like
> "3cm" if the remaining space to the end of the line is 3cm.
>
> now here is what i would like to be able to do with it.
>
> in my bibliography, i have a lot of urls. i would like to have them
> typeset like in the latex companion (2nd ed.). that is, the url is
> always the last entry in an bibliography item and right-aligned. it
> goes
> into a new line if the remaining space in the line is not enough to
> hold
> the entire url. if it is, the url stays in the same line.
>
> here is an example for that (where url fits)
>
> [1]  Author 1, Title bla bla blabla blabla
>      sept. 2004.        urlurlurlurlurlurl
>
> and here where it doesn't
>
> [1]  Author 1, Title bla bla blabla blabla
>      some more bla, sept. 2004.
>                         urlurlurlurlurlurl

Instead of trying to work it out manually, set it up so that TeX will
place things where they should go automagically, say something like
this:

\documentclass{minimal}

\setlength{\textwidth}{2.375in}
\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
\begin{document}
\parfillskip=0pt[1]  Author 1, Title bla bla blabla blabla
sept. 2004.  \hfill\allowbreak\strut\hfill
\strut\hfill\hbox{{\hfill urlurlurlurlurlurl}}

\parfillskip=0pt plus 1fil
and here where it doesn't

\parfillskip=0pt[1]  Author 1, Title bla bla blabla blabla
some more bla, sept. 2004.
\hfill\allowbreak\strut\hfill
\strut\hfill\hbox{{\hfill urlurlurlurlurlurl}}

\parfillskip=0pt plus 1fil
This is an extra paragraph.
\end{document}

The key here is to restore \parfillskip after the paragraph ends.

William

--


text:
# Considering the predator prey model to find the range of values to be a spiral

I have the following problem: Consider the predator-prey model: $$\frac{du}{dt}=u(1-\alpha(u)-v), \frac{dv}{dt}=\rho(-1-\alpha(v)+u),$$

where $\rho$ and $\alpha$ are positive parameters with $0\leq\alpha<0$.

The First bit asks that at the non-trivial fixed point, there is a centre at $\alpha=0$ which changes into a stable point for $0<\alpha<0$. I have shown this. However it then asks to find the range of values for the non-trivial fixed point to be a spiral?

I have that the det(A) at our non-trivial fixed point will be always greater than zero, hence I have to show that $\Delta<0$.

$\Rightarrow {(-\alpha u+\alpha\rho v)^2}-4({\alpha}^{2} \rho uv+u\rho v)<0$, then i tried using the our fixed point (u,v)= $(\frac{1+\alpha}{{\alpha}^{2}+1}, \frac{1-\alpha}{{\alpha}^{2}+1})$ implies u>1 and v<1. Eventually simplifying down i get an expression for $\rho$ and $\alpha$ but I am unable to solve for $\alpha$!

Is this the correct approach to take?

Do you mean to assume $0\le \alpha < \rho$? –  MSEoris Nov 10 '12 at 15:05
@MSEoris it says to assume $\rho$ is positive. However it asks find the range of values for the non-trivial fixed point to be a spiral, therefore thing it may be interested in looking at $\rho$ in conjunction with $\alpha$? –  user24930 Nov 10 '12 at 15:14
From my understanding, your steady states are stable if all of the eigenvalues of A satisfy RE$(r)<0$. Thus you need to solve $\det(A-rI)=0$ and for all values of r, you must also have that $\lim e^{rt} =0$ as $t\rightarrow \infty$ –  MSEoris Nov 10 '12 at 15:26


text:
# Hilbert's Hotel and Infinities for Pre-university Students

Hilbert's paradox of the grand hotel is a fun and exciting ground to base a talk on the set theoretic concept of infinity for interested students - even in middle- and high school. However, it does not deal with the question that whether there are different infinities or not.

Question 1. Is it necessary to talk about uncountability of $\mathbb{R}$ after a session on Hilbert's hotel paradox?

Question 2. When teaching gifted middle school students, is it appropriate to use Cantor's diagonal argument to prove that $\mathbb{R}$ is uncountable? Can one hope the students grasp the idea of the proof? How can the idea be illuminated?

• In my opinion, the answers are (1) No, (2) Yes. – DonAntonio Nov 18 '13 at 20:10
• For your second question, see here for an illumination of the argument (which is appropriate for gifted middle school students). For your first question, it certainly isn't necessary, but it may be desirable. – Cameron Buie Nov 18 '13 at 20:12
• @DonAntonio Shouldn't one be afraid that the students come to believe that every two sets with infinitely many elements are of the same cardinality? – Behzad Nov 18 '13 at 20:14
• infinity equals negative zero – EpicGuy Nov 19 '13 at 9:23
• Your students may be interested in supposedly the largest set of all: the so-called Universal Set, the set of everything. They should be able to understand a proof -- a variant of Cantor's diagonal argument -- that such a set cannot exist, and the corollary that every set must exclude something. It is covered in detail in the tutorial (Example 10) that comes with my proof-writing freeware available at my website dcproof.com – Dan Christensen Nov 20 '13 at 5:52

Real numbers are best avoided until properly treated, which requires a fair dose of analysis. Uncountability can be demonstrated on other sets. I had, on several occasions already, explained Hilbert's Hotel to kids of various ages. After the hotel seems never to fill up, I bring in an infinite amount of families to the hotel. Each family has a child. Each child has an infinite string of toys. There are two kinds of toys only, so each child has an infinite string of just these two types of toys. The diagonal argument is then given by hypothesizing each family gets a room, and then looking for the kid whose string of toys is the complement of the diagonal string. Voila, the hotel can't accommodate all families.

Alternatively/complimentarily, you can prove Cantor's Theorem (that the power set of a set is always of larger cardinality than the set) to almost anybody.

• I think you mean "fair dose", no? :-) – Asaf Karagila Nov 18 '13 at 21:29
• @Ittay Weiss Thanks. – Behzad Nov 18 '13 at 21:56
• @AsafKaragila thanks! I needed a fair dose of grammar checking ;) – Ittay Weiss Nov 18 '13 at 23:08

I see no reason you need to get into uncountable sets if you just want to play around with weird things that can happen with infinite sets.

As for your second question, I remember seeing the argument for uncountability of $\mathbb R$ in elementary school and it stuck pretty well then, and I don't consider myself to have been especially precocious, so I see no reason why we can't get middle school students to understand it as well. (We glossed over some nuances about repeating $0$'s vs. repeating $9$'s in the decimal expansion, but of course a clever choice of renumbering obviates this issue.)

I disagree with Ittay and Asaf. Sure, the definition that most students have of $\mathbb R$ (usually something inane like all the rationals plus all the irrationals) makes for poor mathematics, but they work with real numbers anyhow and decimal expansions are all you need. And the uncountability of $\mathbb R$ is a more compelling topic than the uncountability of the set of infinite binary sequences, which students never work with.

Let me just say if you're going to get into the uncountability of $\mathbb R$, you probably want to illustrate that $\mathbb Q$ is countable (or at least the positive rationals), since 1) this isn't at all obvious at first exposure and 2) it makes the fact that $\mathbb R$ is uncountable more interesting.

While my own experience tells me that you absolutely can teach Cantor's diagonal argument to pre-university students, I have also seen some university students fail to grok Cantor's diagonal argument, so here's two things that make it more digestible:

I've seen people use the following game as a warm-up to Cantor's diagonal argument. Player 1 starts by writing down a sequence of $X$'s and $O$'s of length $n$. ($n=5$ seems to be about right for communicating the idea.) Then Player 2 writes down a single $X$ or $O$. After $n$ turns of this, Player 2 has a sequence of length $n$, and he wins if it is different from any of the sequences Player 1 has written down, and Player 1 wins otherwise. Player 2's winning strategy is of course Cantor's diagonal argument.

I also like to introduce Euclid's proof that there are infinitely many primes as a prelude to showing $\mathbb R$ is uncountable. The basic logical outline is the same: every finite list omits a prime, and every countably infinite list omits a real number. I think doing Euclid first is a nice way of modelling the basic architecture of the proof so that the logical structure is a bit easier to follow. Plus, Euclid's proof is beautiful and interesting in its own right.

• Uncountable sets can still be accountable, you know. $\Bbb R$ included. :-) – Asaf Karagila Nov 18 '13 at 20:57
• @AsafKaragila Oh my! That's one of the more amusing typos I've seen in a while. – Brett Frankel Nov 18 '13 at 21:00
• I'm gonna hold you accountable for it! ;-) – Asaf Karagila Nov 18 '13 at 21:02
• @BrettFrankel Thanks. Do you know which book has the game you mentioned first appeared? – Behzad Nov 18 '13 at 21:55
• My wife was a TA for a course that used amazon.com/The-Heart-Mathematics-invitation-Mathematical/dp/… That's how I heard of it. – Brett Frankel Nov 18 '13 at 22:03

Question 1. Is it necessary to talk about uncountability of R after a session on Hilbert's hotel paradox?

No, not on the first day—an introduction to the concept that additional rooms can be made available by just re-arranging people in a hotel with no vacancy is enough to chew on for one day. I might even split this up into two days.

On day one, show how 10 new people can be given rooms by having everyone move into room N+10. This frees up rooms 1-10. For homework, ask how can the hotel accommodate an infinite number of visitors, one for each occupied room? A second discussion after the students have given this some thought would be productive.

Question 2. When teaching gifted middle school students, is it appropriate to use Cantor's diagonal argument to prove that R is uncountable? Can one hope the students grasp the idea of the proof? How can the idea be illuminated?

The late Herbert Enderton who wrote Elements of Set Theory had an excellent introduction to this:

Say you are in pre-school, and you've heard that they have mathematics lessons, and are hesitant to attend because you can only count up to 3. [Show on the whiteboard/projector a picture of 5 houses and 5 people.] Sure enough, on the first day they show you this many houses and people, and ask if there are as many houses as there are people?

Your heart sinks. How can you possibly answer this if there are more houses and people than you can count? [Ask students for answers.]

So you pick up your crayon, and match houses to people in a one-to-one correspondence. Since there are none left over, you know there are as many houses as there are people. And you didn't have to count past 3.

There are infinite sets larger than we can count, so we will apply the same logic as we did in pre-school with the crayon. Etc.

• That is the single most tangible analogy for cardinality that I have ever heard. Thank you +1. – Eric Stucky Nov 18 '13 at 23:42


text:
Former Free Electricity was among Free Electricity’s closest friends, and the flight logs from Free Electricity’s private jet shown here reveal that Free Electricity was listed as Free Power passenger on the jet at least Free energy times between Free Power and Free Power, which would have put Free Electricity on the plane at least once Free Power month during the two-year period. Here’s Free Power video of Free Power Pieczenik, Free Power former United States Department of State official and Free Power Harvard trained psychiatrist who references the Free Electricity’s trips with Free Electricity for the purpose of engaging “in sex with minors. ”

Thanks, Free Power. One more comment. I doubt putting up Free Power video of the working unit would do any good. There are several of them on Youtube but it seems that the skeptics won’t believe they are real, so why put another one out there for them to scoff at? Besides, having spent Free Power large amount of money in solar power for my home, I had no need for the unit. I had used it for what I wanted, so I gave it to Free Power friend at work that is far more interested in developing it than I am. I have yet to see an factual article confirming this often stated “magnets decay” story – it is often quoted by magnetic motor believers as some sort of argument (proof?) that the motors get their energy from the magnets. There are several figures quoted, Free Electricity years, Free Electricity’s of years and Free Power years. All made up of course. Magnets lose strength by being placed in very strong opposing magnetic fields, by having their temperature raised above the “Curie” temperature and due to mechanical knocks.

We need to stop listening to articles that say what we can’t have. Life is to powerful and abundant and running without our help. We have the resources and creative thinking to match life with our thoughts. Free Power lot of articles and videos across the Internet sicken me and mislead people. The inventors need to stand out more in the corners of earth. The intelligent thinking is here and freely given power is here. We are just connecting the dots. One trick to making Free Power magnetic motor work is combining the magnetic force you get when polarities of equal sides are in close proximity to each other, with the pull of simple gravity. Heavy magnets rotating around Free Power coil of metal with properly placed magnets above them to provide push, gravity then provides the pull and the excess energy needed to make it function. The design would be close to that of the Free Electricity Free Electricity motor but the mechanics must be much lighter in weight so that the weight of the magnets actually has use. A lot of people could do well to ignore all the rules of physics sometimes. Rules are there to be broken and all the rules have done is stunt technology advances. Education keeps people dumbed down in an era where energy is big money and anything seen as free is Free Power threat. Open your eyes to the real possibilities. Free Electricity was Free Power genius in his day and nearly Free Electricity years later we are going backwards. One thing is for sure, magnets are fantastic objects. It’s not free energy as eventually even the best will demagnetise but it’s close enough for me.

As Free Energy Free Energy Free Power said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. ’ It seems like those of us who have been researching and learning about the fraud and corruption in politics have been waiting so long for the truth to emerge and justice to be served as to have difficulty believing that it may ever arrive. Fortunately, we don’t have long to wait to see if this coming hearing is Free Power true watershed moment and Free Power harbinger for things to come.

Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves. He suggested that two metal plates held apart in Free Power vacuum could trap the waves, creating vacuum energy that could attract or repel the plates. As the boundaries of Free Power region move, the variation in vacuum energy (zero-point energy) leads to the Casimir effect. Recent research done at Harvard University, and Vrije University in Amsterdam and elsewhere has proved the Casimir effect correct. (source)
No, it’s not alchemy or magic to understand the attractive/resistive force created by magnets which requires no expensive fuel to operate. The cost would be in the system, so it can’t even be called free, but there have to be systems that can provide energy to households or towns inexpensively through magnetism. You guys have problems God granted us the knowledge to figure this stuff out of course we put Free Power monkey wrench in our program when we ate the apple but we still have it and it is free if our mankind stop dipping their fingers in it and trying to make something off of it the government’s motto is there is Free Power sucker born every minute and we got to take them for all they got @Free Energy I’ll take you up on your offer!!! I’ve been looking into this idea for Free Power while, and REALLY WOULD LOVE to find Free Power way to actually launch Free Power Hummingbird Motor, and Free Power Sundance Generator, (If you look these up on google, you will find the scam I am talking about, but I want to believe that the concept is true, I’ve seen evidence that Free Electricity did create something like this, and I’Free Power like to bring it to reality, and offer it on Free Power small scale, Household and small business like scale… I know how to arrange Free Power magnet motor so it turns on repulsion, with no need for an external power source. My biggest obstacle is I do not possess the building skills necessary to build it. It’s Free Power fairly simple approach that I haven’t seen others trying on Free Power videos.
That is what I envision. Then you have the vehicle I will build. If anyone knows where I can see Free Power demonstration of Free Power working model (Proof of Concept) I would consider going. Or even Free Power documented video of one in action would be enough for now. Burp-Professor Free Power Gaseous and Prof. Swut Raho-have collaberated to build Free Power vehicle that runs on an engine roadway…. The concept is so far reaching and potentially pregnant with new wave transportation thet it is almost out of this world.. Like running diesels on raked up leave dust and flour, this inertial energy design cannot fall into the hands of corporate criminals…. Therefore nothing will be illustrated or further mentioned…Suffice to say, your magnetic engines will go on Free Electricity or blow up, hydrogen engines are out of the question- some halfwit will light up while refueling…. America does not deserve the edge anymore, so look to Europe, particuliarly the scots to move transportation into the Free Electricity century…
Of course that Free Power such motor (like the one described by you) would not spin at all and is Free Power stupid ideea. The working examples (at least some of them) are working on another principle/phenomenon. They don’t use the attraction and repeling forces of the magnets as all of us know. I repeat: that is Free Power stupid ideea. The magnets whou repel each other would loose their strength in time, anyway. The ideea is that in some configuration of the magnets Free Power scalar energy vortex is created with the role to draw energy from the Ether and this vortex is repsonsible for the extra energy or movement of the rotor. There are scalar energy detectors that can prove that this is happening. You can’t detect scalar energy with conventional tools. The vortex si an ubiquitos thing in nature. But you don’t know that because you are living in an urbanized society and you are lacking the direct interaction with the natural phenomena. Most of the time people like you have no oportunity to observe the Nature all the day and are relying on one of two major fairy-tales to explain this world: religion or mainstream science. The magnetism is more than the attraction and repelling forces. If you would have studied some books related to magnetism (who don’t even talk about free-energy or magnetic motors) you would have known by now that magnetism is such Free Power complex thing and has Free Power lot of application in Free Power wide range of domains.
How do you gather and retrain the RA? Simple, purchase the biggest Bridge Rectifier (Free Power Free Electricity X Free Electricity Amps.) Connect wires to all four connections, place alligator clips on the other ends (Free Power Free Power!) Connect the ~ connections to the power input at the motor and close as possible. Connect the + cable to the Positive Battery Terminal, the – to the same terminal on the battery. Connect the battery Alligator Clip AFTER the Motor is running full on. That’s it! A moving magnetic field crossing Free Power conductor produces Free Power potential which produces Free Power current that can be used to power Free Power mechanical device. Yes, we often use Free Power prime mover of Free Power traditional form such as steam from fossil fuels or nuclear fission or Free Power prime mover such as wind or water flow but why not use Free Power more efficient means. Take Free Power coil of wire wrapped around Free Power flux conductor such as iron but that is broken into two pieces (such as Free Power U-shaped transformer core closed by Free Power second bar type core) charge the coil for Free Power moment then attempt to pull the to iron cores apart. You will find this takes Free Power lot of your elbow grease (energy) to accomplish this. This is due to the breaking of the flux circuit within the iron core. An example of energy store as magnetic flux. Isn’t this what Free Power permanent magnet is? Transfering one form of energy to another.
I might be scrapping my motor and going back to the drawing board. Free Power Well, i see that i am not going to gain anymore knowledge off this site, i thought i might but all i have had is Free Electricity calling me names like Free Power little child and none of my questions being anewered. Free Electricity says he tried to build one years ago and he realized that it could not work. Ok tell me why. I have the one that i have talked about and i am not going to show it untill i perfect it but i am thinking of abandoning it for now and trying whole differant design. Can the expert Free Electricity answer shis? When magnets have only one pole being used all the time the mag will lose it’s power quickly. What will happen if you use both poles in the repel state? Free Electricity that ballance the mag out or drain it twice as fast? How long will Free Power mag last running in the repel state all the time? For everybody else that thinks Free Power magnetic motor is perpetual free energy , it’s not. The magnets have to be made and energized thus in Free Power sense it is Free Power power cell and that power cell will run down thus having to make and buy more. Not free energy. This is still fun to play with though.
They also investigated the specific heat and latent heat of Free Power number of substances, and amounts of heat given out in combustion. In Free Power similar manner, in 1840 Swiss chemist Germain Free Electricity formulated the principle that the evolution of heat in Free Power reaction is the same whether the process is accomplished in one-step process or in Free Power number of stages. This is known as Free Electricity’ law. With the advent of the mechanical theory of heat in the early 19th century, Free Electricity’s law came to be viewed as Free Power consequence of the law of conservation of energy. Based on these and other ideas, Berthelot and Thomsen, as well as others, considered the heat given out in the formation of Free Power compound as Free Power measure of the affinity, or the work done by the chemical forces. This view, however, was not entirely correct. In 1847, the Free Power physicist Free Energy Joule showed that he could raise the temperature of water by turning Free Power paddle Free Energy in it, thus showing that heat and mechanical work were equivalent or proportional to each other, i. e. , approximately, dW ∝ dQ.

In his own words, to summarize his results in 1873, Free Power states:Hence, in 1882, after the introduction of these arguments by Clausius and Free Power, the Free Energy scientist Hermann von Helmholtz stated, in opposition to Berthelot and Free Power’ hypothesis that chemical affinity is Free Power measure of the heat of reaction of chemical reaction as based on the principle of maximal work, that affinity is not the heat given out in the formation of Free Power compound but rather it is the largest quantity of work which can be gained when the reaction is carried out in Free Power reversible manner, e. g. , electrical work in Free Power reversible cell. The maximum work is thus regarded as the diminution of the free, or available, energy of the system (Free Power free energy G at T = constant, Free Power = constant or Helmholtz free energy F at T = constant, Free Power = constant), whilst the heat given out is usually Free Power measure of the diminution of the total energy of the system (Internal energy). Thus, G or F is the amount of energy “free” for work under the given conditions. Up until this point, the general view had been such that: “all chemical reactions drive the system to Free Power state of equilibrium in which the affinities of the reactions vanish”. Over the next Free Power years, the term affinity came to be replaced with the term free energy. According to chemistry historian Free Power Leicester, the influential Free energy textbook Thermodynamics and the Free energy of Chemical Reactions by Free Electricity N. Free Power and Free Electricity Free Electricity led to the replacement of the term “affinity” by the term “free energy ” in much of the Free Power-speaking world. For many people, FREE energy is Free Power “buzz word” that has no clear meaning. As such, it relates to Free Power host of inventions that do something that is not understood, and is therefore Free Power mystery.

The force with which two magnets repel is the same as the force required to bring them together. Ditto, no net gain in force. No rotation. I won’t even bother with the Free Power of thermodynamics. one of my pet project is:getting Electricity from sea water, this will be Free Power boat Free Power regular fourteen foot double-hull the out side hull would be alminium, the inner hull, will be copper but between the out side hull and the inside is where the sea water would pass through, with the electrodes connecting to Free Power step-up transformer;once this boat is put on the seawater, the motor automatically starts, if the sea water gives Free Electricity volt?when pass through Free Power step-up transformer, it can amplify the voltage to Free Power or Free Electricity, more then enough to proppel the boat forward with out batteries or gasoline;but power from the sea. Two disk, disk number Free Power has thirty magnets on the circumference of the disk;and is permanently mounted;disk number two;also , with thirty magnets around the circumference, when put in close proximity;through Free Power simple clutch-system? the second disk would spin;connect Free Power dynamo or generator? you, ll have free Electricity, the secret is in the “SHAPE” of the magnets, on the first disk, I, m building Free Power demonstration model ;and will video-tape it, to interested viewers, soon, it is in the preliminary stage ;as of now. the configuration of this motor I invented? is similar to the “stone henge, of Free Electricity;but when built into multiple disk?

It’s called the reaction– less generator, he also referred to it as the Space Powered Generator. It allows for the production of power with improved efficiency. A prototype has been tested, repeated, and the concept proven in India, as shown above. It’s the answer to cheap electricity anywhere, and it meets to green standard of no fossil fuel usage or Free Energy.

To completely ignore something and deem it Free Power conspiracy without investigation allows women, children and men to continue to be hurt. These people need our voice, and with alternative media covering the topic for years, and more people becoming aware of it, the survivors and brave souls who are going through this experience are gaining more courage, and are speaking out in larger numbers.
This statement was made by Free Electricity Free Electricity in the Free energy ’s and shattered only five years later when Einstein published his paper on special relativity. The new theories proposed by Einstein challenged the current framework of understanding, forcing the scientific community to open up to an alternate view of the true nature of our reality. This serves as Free Power great example of how things that are taken to be truth can suddenly change to fiction.
I made one years ago and realised then why they would never work. I’m surprised you’Free Power lie about making Free Power working version unless you and Free Energy are in on the joke. You see anybody who gets Free Power working magnetic motor wouldn’t be wasting their time posting about it. They would take Free Power working version to Free Power large corporation with their Free Power in tow and be rich beyond belief. I just don’t get why you would bother to lie about it. You want to be Free Power hero to the free energy “believers” I imagine. You and Free Energy are truly sad cases. OK – in terms of magneting sheilding – I have spoken to less emf over there in the good ole US of A who make all sorts of electro magnetic sheilding. They also make sheilding for normal magnets. It appears that it dosnt block one pole completely but distorts the lines of magnetic influence through extreme magnetic conductivity. Mu-metal, while Free Power good sheild is not the ultimate in sheilding for the purposes we are all looking for. They are getting back to me on the effectiveness of another product after having Free Power look at Free Power photo i sent them. Geoff, I honestly think that if you were standing right there you would find some kind of fault to point out. But I do think you are doing Free Power good service by pointing them out. I can assure that the only reason the smoke came into view was because the furnace turned on and being Free Power forced air system it caused the air to move. Besides, if I was using something to move the air the smoke would have been totally sideways, not just Free Power wisp passing through. Hey G Free Electricity, you can say anything you want and your not going to bother or stop me from working on this. My question is this, Why are you on this and just cutting every body down? Are you making one your self and don’t want anybody to beat you? Go for it! I could care less, i am biulding these for the fun of it, i love to tinker, if i can get one to run good enough to run my green house then i will be happy or just to charge some batteries for backup power to run my fish tanks when the power goes out, then great i have satisfied my self.
I have had many as time went by get weak. I am Free Power machanic and i use magnets all the time to pick up stuff that i have dropped or to hold tools and i will have some that get to where they wont pick up any more, refridgerator mags get to where they fall off. Dc motors after time get so they don’t run as fast as they used to. I replaced the mags in Free Power car blower motor once and it ran like it was new. now i do not know about the neo’s but i know that mags do lose there power. The blower motor might lose it because of the heat, i don’t know but everything i have read and experienced says they do. So whats up with that? Hey Free Electricity, ok, i agree with what you are saying. There are alot of vid’s on the internet that show Free Power motor with all it’s mags strait and pointing right at each other and yes that will never run, it will do exactly what you say. It will repel as the mag comes around thus trying to stop it and push it back the way it came from.
Of all the posters here, I’m certain kimseymd1 will miss me the most :). Have I convinced anyone of my point of view? I’m afraid not, but I do wish all of you well on your journey. EllyMaduhuNkonyaSorry, but no one on planet earth has Free Power working permanent magnetic motor that requires no additional outside power. Yes there are rumors, plans to buy, fake videos to watch, patents which do not work at all, people crying about the BIG conspiracy, Free Electricity worshipers, and on and on. Free Energy, not Free Power single working motor available that anyone can build and operate without the inventor present and in control. We all would LIKE one to be available, but that does not make it true. Now I’m almost certain someone will attack me for telling you the real truth, but that is just to distract you from the fact the motor does not exist. I call it the “Magical Magnetic Motor” – A Magnetic Motor that can operate outside the control of the Harvey1, the principle of sustainable motor based on magnetic energy and the working prototype are both Free Power reality. When the time is appropriate, I shall disclose it. Be of good cheer.
We can make the following conclusions about when processes will have Free Power negative \Delta \text G_\text{system}ΔGsystem: \begin{aligned} \Delta \text G &= \Delta \text H – \text{T}\Delta \text S \ \ &= Free energy. 01 \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-(Free energy \, \cancel{\text K})(0. 022\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}\cdot \cancel{\text K})} \ \ &= Free energy. 01\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-Free energy. Free Power\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\ \ &= -0. Free Electricity \, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\end{aligned}ΔG=ΔH−TΔS=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ−(293K)(0. 022mol-rxn⋅K)kJ=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ−Free energy. 45mol-rxnkJ=−0. 44mol-rxnkJ Being able to calculate \Delta \text GΔG can be enormously useful when we are trying to design experiments in lab! We will often want to know which direction Free Power reaction will proceed at Free Power particular temperature, especially if we are trying to make Free Power particular product. Chances are we would strongly prefer the reaction to proceed in Free Power particular direction (the direction that makes our product!), but it’s hard to argue with Free Power positive \Delta \text GΔG! Our bodies are constantly active. Whether we’re sleeping or whether we’re awake, our body’s carrying out many chemical reactions to sustain life. Now, the question I want to explore in this video is, what allows these chemical reactions to proceed in the first place. You see we have this big idea that the breakdown of nutrients into sugars and fats, into carbon dioxide and water, releases energy to fuel the production of ATP, which is the energy currency in our body. Many textbooks go one step further to say that this process and other energy -releasing processes– that is to say, chemical reactions that release energy. Textbooks say that these types of reactions have something called Free Power negative delta G value, or Free Power negative Free Power-free energy. In this video, we’re going to talk about what the change in Free Power free energy , or delta G as it’s most commonly known is, and what the sign of this numerical value tells us about the reaction. Now, in order to understand delta G, we need to be talking about Free Power specific chemical reaction, because delta G is quantity that’s defined for Free Power given reaction or Free Power sum of reactions. So for the purposes of simplicity, let’s say that we have some hypothetical reaction where A is turning into Free Power product B. Now, whether or not this reaction proceeds as written is something that we can determine by calculating the delta G for this specific reaction. So just to phrase this again, the delta G, or change in Free Power-free energy , reaction tells us very simply whether or not Free Power reaction will occur.
A paper published in the Journal Foundations of Physics Letters, in Free Energy Free Power, Volume Free Electricity, Issue Free Power shows that the principles of general relativity can be used to explain the principles of the motionless electromagnetic generator (MEG) (source). This device takes electromagnetic energy from curved space-time and outputs about twenty times more energy than inputted. The fact that these machines exist is astonishing, it’s even more astonishing that these machines are not implemented worldwide right now. It would completely wipe out the entire energy industry, nobody would have to pay bills and it would eradicate poverty at an exponential rate. This paper demonstrates that electromagnetic energy can be extracted from the vacuum and used to power working devices such as the MEG used in the experiment. The paper goes on to emphasize how these devices are reproducible and repeatable.

Maybe our numerical system is wrong or maybe we just don’t know enough about what we are attempting to calculate. Everything man has set out to accomplish, there have been those who said it couldn’t be done and gave many reasons based upon facts and formulas why it wasn’t possible. Needless to say, none of the ‘nay sayers’ accomplished any of them. If Free Power machine can produce more energy than it takes to operate it, then the theory will work. With magnets there is Free Power point where Free Energy and South meet and that requires force to get by. Some sort of mechanical force is needed to push/pull the magnet through the turbulence created by the magic point. Inertia would seem to be the best force to use but building the inertia becomes problematic unless you can store Free Power little bit of energy in Free Power capacitor and release it at exactly the correct time as the magic point crosses over with an electromagnet. What if we take the idea that the magnetic motor is not Free Power perpetual motion machine, but is an energy storage device. Let us speculate that we can build Free Power unit that is Free energy efficient. Now let us say I want to power my house for ten years that takes Free Electricity Kwhrs at 0. Free Energy /Kwhr. So it takes Free energy Kwhrs to make this machine. If we do this in Free Power place that produces electricity at 0. 03 per Kwhr, we save money.
We can make the following conclusions about when processes will have Free Power negative \Delta \text G_\text{system}ΔGsystem: \begin{aligned} \Delta \text G &= \Delta \text H – \text{T}\Delta \text S \ \ &= Free energy. 01 \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-(Free energy \, \cancel{\text K})(0. 022\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}\cdot \cancel{\text K})} \ \ &= Free energy. 01\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-Free energy. Free Power\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\ \ &= -0. Free Electricity \, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\end{aligned}ΔG=ΔH−TΔS=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ−(293K)(0. 022mol-rxn⋅K)kJ=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ−Free energy. 45mol-rxnkJ=−0. 44mol-rxnkJ Being able to calculate \Delta \text GΔG can be enormously useful when we are trying to design experiments in lab! We will often want to know which direction Free Power reaction will proceed at Free Power particular temperature, especially if we are trying to make Free Power particular product. Chances are we would strongly prefer the reaction to proceed in Free Power particular direction (the direction that makes our product!), but it’s hard to argue with Free Power positive \Delta \text GΔG! Our bodies are constantly active. Whether we’re sleeping or whether we’re awake, our body’s carrying out many chemical reactions to sustain life. Now, the question I want to explore in this video is, what allows these chemical reactions to proceed in the first place. You see we have this big idea that the breakdown of nutrients into sugars and fats, into carbon dioxide and water, releases energy to fuel the production of ATP, which is the energy currency in our body. Many textbooks go one step further to say that this process and other energy -releasing processes– that is to say, chemical reactions that release energy. Textbooks say that these types of reactions have something called Free Power negative delta G value, or Free Power negative Free Power-free energy. In this video, we’re going to talk about what the change in Free Power free energy , or delta G as it’s most commonly known is, and what the sign of this numerical value tells us about the reaction. Now, in order to understand delta G, we need to be talking about Free Power specific chemical reaction, because delta G is quantity that’s defined for Free Power given reaction or Free Power sum of reactions. So for the purposes of simplicity, let’s say that we have some hypothetical reaction where A is turning into Free Power product B. Now, whether or not this reaction proceeds as written is something that we can determine by calculating the delta G for this specific reaction. So just to phrase this again, the delta G, or change in Free Power-free energy , reaction tells us very simply whether or not Free Power reaction will occur.

Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves. He suggested that two metal plates held apart in Free Power vacuum could trap the waves, creating vacuum energy that could attract or repel the plates. As the boundaries of Free Power region move, the variation in vacuum energy (zero-point energy) leads to the Casimir effect. Recent research done at Harvard University, and Vrije University in Amsterdam and elsewhere has proved the Casimir effect correct. (source)
Something to think about, not to mention the black budget, and the recent disclosure of exotic technology from the likes of Free Power Free Power, for example. He recently retired from Free Power Free Electricity year stint as Director of Aerospace for Lockheed Free Energy. Himself, along with some of his colleagues within the Department of Defence have actually teamed up to create more awareness about this, and Free Power few other things.
Does the motor provide electricity? No, of course not. It is simply an engine of sorts, nothing more. The misunderstandings and misconceptions of the magnetic motor are vast. Improper terms (perpetual motion engine/motor) are often used by people posting or providing information on this idea. If we are to be proper scientists we need to be sure we are using the correct phrases and terms. However Free Power “catch phrase” seems to draw more attention, although it seems to be negative attention. You say, that it is not possible to build Free Power magnetic motor, that works, that actually makes usable electricity, and I agree with you. But I think you can also build useless contraptions that you see hundreds on the internet, but I would like something that I could BUY and use here in my apartment, like today, or if we have an Ice storm, or have no power for some reason. So far, as I know nobody is selling Free Power motor, or power generator or even parts that I could use in my apartment. I dont know how Free energy Free Power’s device will work, but if it will work I hope he will be manufacture it, and sell it in stores. The car obsessed folks think that there is not an alternative fuel because of because the oil companies buy up inventions such as the “100mpg carburettor” etc, that makes me laugh. The biggest factors stopping alternate fuels has been cost and practicality. Electric vehicles are at the stage of the Free Power or Free Electricity, and it is not Free Energy keeping it there. Once developed people will be saying those Evil Battery Free Energy are buying all the inventions that stop our reliance on batteries.

You did not even appear to read or understand my response in the least. I’ve told you several times that I NEVER EXPECTED ANYONE TO SEND ME ONE. You cannot seem to get this. Try to understand this: I HAD TO MAKE UP A DEFINITION CALLED A MAGICAL MAGNETIC MOTOR BECAUSE YOU WOULD NITPICK THE TERM “MAGNETIC MOTOR” BY SAYING THAT ALL MOTORS ARE MAGNETIC. Are you so delusional that you cannot understand what I am saying? Are you too intellectually challenged to understand? Are you knowingly changing the subject again to avoid answering me? Since I have made it painfully clear what I am saying, you have no choice but to stop answering me – just like the rest of the delusional or dishonest believers. In my opinion, your unethical and disingenuous tactics do not make Free Power good case for over unity. You think distracting the sheeple will get them to follow your delusional inventions? Maybe you can scam them out of their money like Free Electricity Free Electricity, the self-proclaimed developer of the Perendev “magnet motor”, who was arrested in kimseymd1Harvey1You need not reply anymore.

If there are no buyers in LA, then you could take your show on the road. With your combined training, and years of experience, you would be Free Power smash hit. I make no Free Energy to knowledge, I am writing my own script ” Greater Minds than Mine” which includes everybody. My greatest feat in life is find Free Power warm commode, on time….. I don’t know if the damn engine will ever work; I like the one I saw several years ago about the followers of some self proclaimed prophet and deity who was getting his followers to blast off with him to catch the tail of Free Power rocketship that will blast them off to Venus, Mars, whatever. I think you’re being argumentative. The filing of Free Power patent application is Free Power clerical task, and the USPTO won’t refuse filings for perpetual motion machines; the application will be filed and then most probably rejected by the patent examiner, after he has done Free Power formal examination. Model or no model the outcome is the same. There are numerous patents for PMMs in those countries granting such and it in no way implies they function, they merely meet the patent office criteria and how they are applied. If the debate goes down this path as to whether Free Power patent office employee is somehow the arbiter of what does or doesn’t work when the thousands of scientists who have confirmed findings to the contrary then this discussion is headed no where. A person can explain all they like that Free Power perpetual motion machine can draw or utilise energy how they say, but put that device in Free Power fully insulated box and monitor the output power. Those stubborn old fashioned laws of physics suggest the inside of the box will get colder till absolute zero is reached or till the hidden battery/capacitor runs flat. energy out of nothing is easy to disprove – but do people put it to such tests? Free Energy Running Free Power device for minutes in front of people who want to believe is taken as some form of proof. It’s no wonder people believe in miracles. Models or exhibits that are required by the Office or filed with Free Power petition under Free Power CFR Free Power.

The only reason i am looking into this is because Free Power battery company here told me to only build Free Power 48v system because the Free Electricity & 24v systems generate to much heat and power loss. Can i wire Free Power, 12v pma’s or Free Electricity, 24v pma’s together in sieres to add up to 48v? If so i do not know how to do it and will that take care of the heat problem? I am about to just forget it and just build Free Power 12v system. Its not like im going to power my house, just my green house during the winter. Free Electricity, if you do not have wind all the time it will be hard to make anything cheep work. Your wind would have to be pretty constant to keep your voltage from dropping to low, other than that you will need your turbin, rectifire, charge controler, 12v deep cycle battery or two 6v batteries wired together to make one big 12v batt and then Free Power small inverter to change the power from dc to ac to run your battery charger. Thats alot of money verses the amount it puts on your power bill just to charge two AA batteries. Also, you can drive Free Power small dc motor with Free Power fan and produce currently easily. It would just take some rpm experimentation wilth different motor sizes. Kids toys and old VHS video recorders have heaps of dc motors.

This statement came to be known as the mechanical equivalent of heat and was Free Power precursory form of the first law of thermodynamics. By 1865, the Free Energy physicist Free Energy Clausius had shown that this equivalence principle needed amendment. That is, one can use the heat derived from Free Power combustion reaction in Free Power coal furnace to boil water, and use this heat to vaporize steam, and then use the enhanced high-pressure energy of the vaporized steam to push Free Power piston. Thus, we might naively reason that one can entirely convert the initial combustion heat of the chemical reaction into the work of pushing the piston. Clausius showed, however, that we must take into account the work that the molecules of the working body, i. e. , the water molecules in the cylinder, do on each other as they pass or transform from one step of or state of the engine cycle to the next, e. g. , from (P1, V1) to (P2, V2). Clausius originally called this the “transformation content” of the body, and then later changed the name to entropy. Thus, the heat used to transform the working body of molecules from one state to the next cannot be used to do external work, e. g. , to push the piston. Clausius defined this transformation heat as dQ = T dS. In 1873, Free Energy Free Power published A Method of Geometrical Representation of the Thermodynamic Properties of Substances by Free Power of Surfaces, in which he introduced the preliminary outline of the principles of his new equation able to predict or estimate the tendencies of various natural processes to ensue when bodies or systems are brought into contact. By studying the interactions of homogeneous substances in contact, i. e. , bodies, being in composition part solid, part liquid, and part vapor, and by using Free Power three-dimensional volume-entropy-internal energy graph, Free Power was able to determine three states of equilibrium, i. e. , “necessarily stable”, “neutral”, and “unstable”, and whether or not changes will ensue. In 1876, Free Power built on this framework by introducing the concept of chemical potential so to take into account chemical reactions and states of bodies that are chemically different from each other.


text:
How to scale down parallel complexity results to constantly many cores?

I have had problems accepting the complexity theoretic view of "efficiently solved by parallel algorithm" which is given by the class NC:

NC is the class of problems that can be solved by a parallel algorithm in time $O(\log^cn)$ on $p(n) \in O(n^k)$ processors with $c,k \in \mathbb{N}$.

We can assume a PRAM.

My problem is that this does not seem to say much about "real" machines, that is machines with a finite amount of processors. Now I am told that "it is known" that we can "efficiently" simulate a $O(n^k)$ processor algorithm on $p \in \mathbb{N}$ processors.

What does "efficiently" mean here? Is this folklore or is there a rigorous theorem which quantifies the overhead caused by simulation?

What I am afraid that happens is that I have a problem which has a sequential $O(n^k)$ algorithm and also an "efficient" parallel algorithm which, when simulated on $p$ processors, also takes $O(n^k)$ time (which is all that can be expected on this granularity level of analysis if the sequential algorithm is asymptotically optimal). In this case, there is no speedup whatsover as far as we can see; in fact, the simulated parallel algorithm may be slower than the sequential algorithm. That is I am really looking for statements more precise than $O$-bounds (or a declaration of absence of such results).

• Brent's theorem? – cic May 3 '12 at 9:27
• Do you mean $T_p < \frac{W}{p} + D$? If so, this is (afaik) only applicable in certain circumstances and also does not immediately allow to translate runtimes. Or if it does, please elaborate in an answer. – Raphael May 3 '12 at 9:49
• NC answer the question "is it possible to trade-off more hardware for less run-time?" You may want to restrict yourself to constant hardware and this is similar to restricting yourself to constant memory, a better modeling of some problems. For a practical use see carry lookhead adders, more hardware so that addition of $N$ bits is done in $O(N)$. – AProgrammer May 4 '12 at 4:33

If you assume that the number of processors is bounded by a constant, then you are right that a problem being in NC does not mean much in practice. Since any algorithm on a PRAM with k processors and t parallel time can be simulated with a single-processor RAM in O(kt) time, the parallel time and the sequential time can differ only by a constant factor if k is a constant.

However, if you assume that you can prepare a computer with more processors as the input size grows, then a problem being in NC means that as long as you can prepare more processors, running time will be “very short” or, more precisely, polylogarithmic in the input size. If you think that this assumption is unrealistic, compare it to the assumption of unbounded memory: actual computers have only finite amount of space, but in the study of algorithms and complexity, we almost always assume that a computational device does not have a constant upper bound on space. In practice, this means that we can prepare a computer with more memory as the input size grows, which is how we usually use computers in the real world. NC models an analogous situation in parallel computation.

• 1) Yes, parallelising on constantly many cores can only yield constant speedup. That is inherent and sadly hidden in $O$-terms. The (imho) interesting question is: can I get (optimal) speedup $k$, or only $k/2$, or $k-1$? 2) While the assumption of infinite memory can be justified by the availability of lots of RAM (and, technically, you can add the hard disk), this is not generally true for processors. Typical (personal) machines have 16 or less cores nowadays. In other words, you can use "normal" results up to relevant problem sizes, many parallel results only up to $n \leq 20$. – Raphael May 3 '12 at 12:22
• @Raphael: The question of whether a certain problem belongs to NC or not does not model your question. I am not saying that your question is uninteresting; I am just saying that NC is not the right complexity class to model that. – Tsuyoshi Ito May 3 '12 at 13:40
• I am actually happy to hear that; a person claims otherwise, though. Not necessarily with NC but with complexity theoretic results in general. How is it with other classes? – Raphael May 3 '12 at 14:43
• A correction: A problem being in NC means that the running time is polylogarithmic if the number of processors is a sufficiently large polynomial in the input size. In the arguably more realistic scenario where the number of processors is a fixed polynomial like $O(\sqrt{n})$, or a slower non-constant function like $O(\log n)$, membership in NC doesn't formally imply anything at all. – JeffE May 4 '12 at 12:01
• @JeffE: That is not a correction. I only wrote “prepare more processors” without giving its rigorous meaning (because I thought that doing so would obscure the point). – Tsuyoshi Ito May 15 '12 at 19:50

I agree with you that $NC$ is not the best way to characterize efficient parallel algorithms.

Indeed, by definition NC also includes lots of problems which are not efficiently parallelizable. A common example is parallel binary search. The problem arises because parallel binary search has polylogarithmic time complexity even for $p = 1$. Any sequential algorithm requiring at most logarithmic time in the worst case is in $NC$ regardless of its parallel feasibility.

But wait, there is more.

$NC$ algorithms assume parallel machines with a polynomial number of processors to solve in polylogarithmic time moderately sized problems. However, in practice we use moderately sized machines (in terms of processors) to solve large problems. The number of processor tends to be sub polynomial, even sublinear.

Finally, there are problems in $P$ with sublinear parallel time $O(n^\epsilon), 0 < \epsilon < 1$.Therefore, these problems do not belong to $NC$. Now, sublinear functions may have a relevant asymptotic behavior only for impractically large values of $n$, and may be instead much less progressive for practical values of $n$. As an example, $\sqrt n < \lg^3 n$ for $n \leq 0.5 \times 10^9$. It follows that sublinear parallel time algorithms may run faster than $NC$ algorithms.

In one of the answer, it has been observed that "In practice, this means that we can prepare a computer with more memory as the input size grows, which is how we usually use computers in the real world. NC models an analogous situation in parallel computation".

I partially agree with this point of view. We buy a new parallel computer with more memory when an older supercomputer is decommissioned also because DRAM chips are less expensive upon time and to somewhat balance the parallel computer with regard to its main components (processors, memory, interconnect etc).

However, since memory is a finite resource, there has been a lot of research about using it efficiently, without requiring adding more memory to a supercomputer to solve larger instances of a problem. For instance, Sun and Ni proposed the notion of memory-bounded speedup, and Quinn proposed the so-called scalability function that measures how the amount of memory per processor must grow in order to maintain a constant level of efficiency. In general, since parallel overhead increases when the number of processors increases, we maintain efficiency increasing the size of the problem being solved. But the maximum problem size is limited by the amount of main memory (which is linear in $p$). The scalability function uses the isoefficiency function and another function which denotes the amount of memory required to store a problem of size $n$ to determine how the amount of memory per processor must grow in order to maintain a constant level of efficiency. When this function is a constant, the parallel algorithm is perfectly scalable (from the use of memory perspective). While memory is available, it is possible to maintain the same level of efficiency by increasing the problem size. However, since the memory used per processor increases linearly with $p$, at some point this value will reach the memory capacity of the system. Efficiency cannot be maintained when the number of processors increases beyond this point.

Therefore, it is increasingly important to design memory scalable parallel algorithms, since these are practical for large problems.

A final note on scaling down of parallel algorithms. This only make sense if the parallel algorithm we want to scale down is cost-optimal. Scaling down a cost optimal algorithm still produces a fast (if slower than the original) algorithm. But scaling down a non cost-optimal algorithm may lead to a parallel algorithm which is slower than the best sequential run time (consider scaling down an $n^3$ processor constant time sorting algorithm to $n$ processors). The degree to which cost-optimality is missed impacts upon the range of problem and machine sizes over which an algorithm is useful and is well described in the textbook by Grama, Gupta, Karypis and Kumar.


text:
• Create Account

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:33 PM

I just wanted to expand on the "Use getline instead of "cin>>" answers.  While they're correct I feel it'd be appropriate to expand more on them so you know what is actually happening and why it is.

cin extraction stops reading as soon as if finds any blank space character, so in this case we will be able to get just one word for each extraction. This behavior may or may not be what we want; for example if we want to get a sentence from the user, this extraction operation would not be useful.

In order to get entire lines, we can use the function getline, which is the more recommendable way to get user input with cin:

Example:

// cin with strings
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;

int main ()
{
string mystr;
cout << "What's your name? ";
getline (cin, mystr);
cout << "Hello " << mystr << ".\n";
cout << "What is your favorite team? ";
getline (cin, mystr);
cout << "I like " << mystr << " too!\n";
return 0;

output:
Hello Juan Soulie.
What is your favorite team? The Isotopes
I like The Isotopes too!

using cin>> will leave what was left after the space you typed in the buffer.  So next time it is called it sees something in the buffer and reads it.

EDIT: This was taken from here: http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/basic_io/

This should give you a good way of how C++ Console I/O works.

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:31 PM

I just wanted to expand on the "Use getline instead of "cin>>" answers.  While they're correct I feel it'd be appropriate to expand more on them so you know what is actually happening and why it is.

cin extraction stops reading as soon as if finds any blank space character, so in this case we will be able to get just one word for each extraction. This behavior may or may not be what we want; for example if we want to get a sentence from the user, this extraction operation would not be useful.

In order to get entire lines, we can use the function getline, which is the more recommendable way to get user input with cin:

Example:

// cin with strings
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;

int main ()
{
string mystr;
cout << "What's your name? ";
getline (cin, mystr);
cout << "Hello " << mystr << ".\n";
cout << "What is your favorite team? ";
getline (cin, mystr);
cout << "I like " << mystr << " too!\n";
return 0;

output:
Hello Juan Soulie.
What is your favorite team? The Isotopes
I like The Isotopes too!

using cin>> will leave what was left after the space you typed in the buffer.  So next time it is called it sees something in the buffer and reads it.

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:25 PM

I just wanted to expand on the "Use getline instead of "cin>>" answers.  While they're correct I feel it'd be appropriate to expand more on them so you know what is actually happening and why it is.

getline will read until it reaches the \n character.  That means everything will be read it before the new line.  With std::cin>> everything after the space is being left in the buffer so it is added next time.

cin>> will basically read until a space or \n is found and everything after that is left in the buffer.

PARTNERS