• Kavita Oza asked a question:
    How to compute time complexity for parallel algorithms in form of asymptotic notations?

    Complexity of parallel algorithms in big O notation. 

  • Yuanxin Li added an answer:
    What is the best method for exfoliation of 2D materials like MOS2,BN and graphene regarding quality, yield and less time consuming?

    please do send some paper regarding best method for exfoliation

    Yuanxin Li · Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, CAS

    No best method, i think. Every method has its advantages and disadvantages. LPE (liquid phase exfoliation)  is easy, scalble and less time consuming, but the prepared samples are small size with different thickness. CVD is complicated and time consuming, but the sample has good quality. Hope this can help you.

  • Morteza Amjadi added an answer:
    What is the best method for exfoliation of 2D materials like MOS2,BN and graphene regardind yield and quality and less time consuming?

    Do guide please

    Morteza Amjadi · Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Stuttgart

    Please check this article:

    http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v13/n6/full/nmat3944.html

  • Jim Zheng added an answer:
    Before the big bang, did time exist? If it did, is time invented by man or God's creation?
    I believe time is a measure of duration, and man invented clock to measure time. Therefore there should be an empiricism that explains the time that dark matter and dark energy existed before the big bang
    Jim Zheng · University of Sydney

    Special Relativity tells us that this humanistic notion of "time" is relative to the speed of travelling observers. Time can be thought of as analogous to the "unfolding of space", where space unfolds to make our measurements of the speed of light in any reference frame constant.

    If this is our definition of time—a time dependent on space (and, incidentally, related to entropy)—and the big bang is the phenomenon that created space, then to ask what "caused" or was "before" the big bang makes no logical sense, since there was no space or time "before" the big bang. 

    The unraveling of space allows for the increase in entropy, which in turn allows for our cultural perception of "time".

  • Joseph Feulefack added an answer:
    What is the role of the train planner with regards to the below mentioned?

    The key strategy, facts and principal elements a train planner needs to consider when compiling a train plan with regards to the sectional running times, station dwell times, the layover times and the engineering, pathing and perfrmance allowance to bear in mind.

    Joseph Feulefack · University of Alberta

    Another video that may help:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39PKfU4cRBc

  • Sergey Fisenko added an answer:
    What happens if we reverse time in the Stefan (phase transition) problem ?

    Or to make it simpler just change t into -t  in a parabolic type equation, e.g. heat conduction equation? Will it become an ill-posed problem? Will it have a physical meaning? I came up with 1 example when it has for the Stefan-type problem with phase changes.

    Sergey Fisenko · National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

    We can reverse time for the Stefan problem. Example pls see in my paper in RG with Khodyko and Saverchenko. Also, we have to keep in mind that instead of evaporation we have to consider the condensation. 

  • J. C. N. Smith added an answer:
    Is the flow of time an illusion?
    This has been discussed on ResearchGate in a rather ad hoc way in relation to another question about the absolute immutability of some physical laws but it really deserves its own separate discussion. Below I summarise the arguments in favour.
    The philosophers
    The nature of time has been the subject of discussion by philosophers for 2000 years or more. In the last two decades their views have crystallised. If time flows - (1) How do we know? and (2) How do we measure its speed? In other words - what frame of reference can we use to measure time?
    The philosophers' conclusion is that they would have to invent another time dimension for the purpose but this would then need a third time dimension and so on ad infinitum. This would be absurd and so they conclude that the flow of time is an illusion.
    Relativity, Einstein and Godel (A World Without Time - Palle Yourgrau - Penguin Books, 2005)
    According to the theories of relativity two observers can never agree on the simultaneity of two events that both witness and neither has a "preferred" position that makes one of them correct. This implies that all events already exist and that what we perceive as the flow of time is an illusion.
    Godel showed that rotating universes were consistent with relativity and proved that in them it was possible to travel back in time. He immediately realised that this implied that the past must still exist and that what he called "intuitive time" is therefore an illusion. In 1949 he published a formal proof that time (in our intuitive sense) cannot exist in any universe. This uncomfortable discovery was ignored for nearly half a century but was revived by Julian Barbour in "The End of Time" and is now widely discussed and accepted by many physicists.
    The Laws of Physics
    The fundamental laws of physics describing the forces are time-symmetric.
    What can we say about the time dimension?
    Time still exists but only as a chronological map in which events are located;
    Time is not in any way like the spatial dimensions because:
    It is anisotropic and contains an entropy gradient;
    If we exist in more than one location in any of the spatial dimensions then we will also always then be in different locations in the time dimension;
    Separations in 4 dimensions are extensions of Pythagoras's Theorem but have the form:
    separation = √[x2 + y2 + z2 - (ct)2], which means that time measurements are imaginary (ict) where i=√(-1), as Hawking suggests in "A Brief History of Time".
    Consequences
    Free will is also an illusion
    We live all our lives all the time but every instant feels like "now"
    Time travel is impossible because (a) there is no dimension in which travel is possible, (b) we occupy all the spacetime of our lives and cannot take back to an earlier time our memories of a later time.
    J. C. N. Smith · Independent Researcher

    Stephen,

    I believe you might enjoy reading my essay, 'Toward a Helpful Paradigm for the Nature of Time,' which you can easily find by googling the title.

  • Azlan Muharam added an answer:
    Can anyone comment on the performance of using FPGA and GPU for image processing ?

    In term of time, latency, throughput,area and slicing

    Azlan Muharam · Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

    many thanks for those ideas and comments really appreciated.

  • Brandon Thomas added an answer:
    What are the timescales of perception and memory?

    When does perception end and memory begin? This question is rarely considered but has important implications for the science of psychology.

    Folk intuition suggests that perception ends once the object of experience is no longer stimulating the senses. However, this demarcation lacks scientific rigor and is inconsistent with many physical theories of time.

    Take for example time considered as a spacetime continuum. Meaningful events that unfold relative to an organism are always defined by time-like intervals. Therefore, the use of spacetime as a model for time in psychology would lead to the conclusion that every experience is memory-based.

    I would be happy for any contributions you might have to this discussion!

    Brandon Thomas · University of Cincinnati

    Thanks for your contribution to this thread, Alfredo. I believe that this account (along the lines of the Atkinson-Shiffrin multi-store model of memory) provides an important perspective on this discussion. Thus conceived, time is parsed relative to the duration of a CNS response to a stimulus.

    While this is perfectly reasonable and has led to immense productivity in our field, I still wonder whether there is a more lucrative description of time for psychology. After all, there is a paucity of meaningful aspects of experience that last a mere 500 ms. Most of our psychophysical experiments (purportedly testing perception) require participants to report on stimuli within a much longer time frame. This stimulus duration is not even long enough to control actions without the use of simulated feedback. Are we really capturing perception within this reference frame?

    I am hoping we can find a definition of time that lawfully captures the regularities of experience. If physicists and cosmologists can use models of time and space to capture fundamental regularities in the universe, can psychologists hope to do the same?  

  • Martin Ritterath added an answer:
    Does anybody know any continuous function in time domain whose frequency response looks like the attached figure?

    I want a function in time domain whose frequency response should be of the form shown in the following figure.

    Martin Ritterath · Systag

    Yes, interpolate the polynomial and do invers Fourier transform.

    Good luck

  • Closed account added an answer:
    How you organize your work and time?
    Do you plan things out in microdetails or you are a spontaneous person?
    Deleted · University of Dammam

    it depends on the nature of the work as well as time availability ,

    and priority is key !

  • Durga Prasad added an answer:
    Can I use omnetpp-4.6-src-windows with inet-2.99.0-src.tgz and Castalia-3.3?

    If install the versions of all this program together, is it ok?  because some times we must use older version. i would like make sure no problem will happen.

    Durga Prasad · NMAM Institute of Technology

    But for BAN ( Body Area Networks) you can use Castalia and Omnet++. There are manuals for both..

  • Suman Maroju added an answer:
    How can I use pdf in Matlab to plot a graph?

    I have time period values on the X-axis and the probability of an event occurring at a particular time on the Y-axis.

    Suman Maroju · IIT Kharagpur

    y = pdf(pd,x)

  • Ahmed Dhamad added an answer:
    As a part of preparing TBE buffer, can we keep the EDTA solution after preparing it for a week before autoclaving it?

    Hi every one, I am going to prepare a TBE buffer, and the EDTA preparation takes a long time, so can I keep the EDTA without autoclaving for a long time until I get ready to do so.

    Ahmed Dhamad · University of Arkansas

    Hi Muna, Yes, you can 

  • Sh. Arshadnejad added an answer:
    Is there an equation relating time and concrete strength?

    Is there an equation relating time and concrete strength?

    Sh. Arshadnejad · Islamic Azad University

    Hi,

    You can find a general model to predict of concrete strength in due time, in a reference book about concrete. It is Concrete properties by Professor Novill.

    Thanks a lot

  • Junfu Bu added an answer:
    How can I determine the parameters to prepare a pellet?

    I wanted to prepare a pellet from a powder using a uniaxial press and a matrix attached to a pump, but with the pressure and the holding time that I have chosen, the pellet obtained breaks up.
    Are there a way to determine the correct pressure and holding time before launching tests?

  • Ahmed Dhamad asked a question:
    How many times can we use GE Healthcare GSTrap FF, 1 ml?

    How many times can we use GE Healthcare GSTrap FF, 1 ml, which is an affinity chromatography column that can capture GST taged-protein ? 

  • J. G. Muga added an answer:
    Can someone suggest review literature and mentions about time discretization?
    I would like to get basic knowledge in this topic at least basics. Because I'm new in this field I don't know what is a better way to start. Could anybody suggest any reviews and books on such a topic, or at least where it was mentioned and discussed?
  • Vladimir A. Kulchitsky added an answer:
    Is time in geometrical form ? If yes, how to define the geometric shape? If not, then how is it?

    In the circuit model system, After the rise of the time axis in system of equations and operation we found that the time can be central axis and motion system and can form geometric.

    Vladimir A. Kulchitsky · National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

    To form a geometric shape - it takes time. And vice versa. Time to be measured.

  • Ahmed Majed added an answer:
    Do you know how to generate a pulse in Simulink with its rising and falling edges are predefined?

    Just as timer block but  with two inputs for its vectors.

    time (t   0.1-t    0.1+t    0.2-t)

    Magnitude  (1 0 1 0)

    the pulse is continuous... and the block can be used in a close loop.

    Ahmed Majed · Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

    Dear friends ,,

    thanks a lot for your help and cooperation.

    actually the answer for the problem is achieved by using math functions and  relation &logic operators. 

    regarding repeating sequence builder and pulse generators as mentioned by K. Prakash Kumar and Nooriana Nynza,they can not be used in a close loop system to produce a specific pulse. as my aim is to produce a pulse with specific rising and falling edges at specific sensed angle(converted to time).

    Regarding pulse shaping filter I could not use it to produce the expected pulse,as i did not get the idea of t clearly, Roger Moliner .

    Best Regards for all.

  • Andrew Wutke added an answer:
    A question on Time as an emergent property
    Time can be viewed as an emergent property : whenever any change occurs anywhere in the universe - in other words whenever the state space of the universe undergoes any change - then Time itself happens and 'notches up' one tick (at least in the 'neighbourhood' of the change, which is a separate discussion.)

    But isn't this circular reasoning ? For a change in state space to be able to occur in the fist place, isn't the pre-existence of something like time a prerequisite ?

    The only way out of this conundrum is that all elementary state space changes must happen out of time, i.e. instantaneously (with a delta time = 0.) But this would then require the superimposed coexistence of 2 elementary state spaces. Can this happen ? We could probably engineer a situation where the Pauli exclusion principle would then be violated. This would tend to prove that Time as an emergent property cannot be the whole story?

    Any comments?
    Andrew Wutke · Thales Group

    Chris,

    I agree that time as an emergent property is a step in the right direction.

    The next step is that there is no universal emergent tick. Simply there is no time at all.

    Things change interact in one common reality. Some of them are selected as clocks to compare with other states. All I see is a vast number of changing coexisting states of coexisting objects.

    I see some relevance of the concept of traffic. It emerges from the properties of vehicles that move. There is no point you can put your finger and say this is traffic. You finger will always point to a vehicle. Traffic is an abstract concept, like time it "flows" and you can calculate flow rate (number of cars in my street per number of cars in the reference  street both between dawn and dusk) .

    Newton's concept of absolute time has not been abolished as it is claimed, but it has been multiplied and shifted to each inertial frame. We need one more step to abolish it altogether and free ourselves from this entanglement.

    But change as such, and memory of past states is a bit of a mystery so there is plenty of interesting problems yet to be solved by science.

  • Avan Al-Saffar asked a question:
    Why am I getting (Warning:Minimum step size reached near x = 3.14159There may be a singularity, or the tolerances may be too tight) in Matlab?

    My code is :

    function RunlogisticOscilfisher 

    omega=1;

    N0=1;

    k = 10;

    A = 1;

    p0 = .1;

    tspan=(0:0.1:10);

    [t,p] = ode45(@logisticOscilnumerical,tspan,p0,[],omega,k,N0);

     figure (1)

    plot(t,p)

    P = @(T) interp1(t,p,T)

    f = @(t) ( ( A.*( ( N0.* (sin(omega.*t)).^2 .*(1-(2.*P(t)./k))+(omega.*cos(omega.*t) ) ).^2 ) ./( (N0).^2.*(sin(omega.*t)).^4.*((P(t)-(P(t).^2./k)).^2 ) ) ) ) ;

    I1 = integral( f, 1,2,'ArrayValued',true)./2

    I2 = integral( f, 1,4,'ArrayValued',true)./4

    I3 = integral( f, 1,6,'ArrayValued',true)./6

    I4 = integral( f, 1,8,'ArrayValued',true)./8

    I5 = integral( f, 1,10,'ArrayValued',true)./10

    I=[I1,I2,I3,I4,I5]

    T=[2,4,6,8,10]

    figure(2)

    plot(T,I./10.^34)

    title('The Fisher Information with time')

    xlabel('Time')

    ylabel('Fisher Information')

    1;

    % function dpdt = logisticOscilnumerical(t,p,omega,k,N0)

    % dpdt = N0*sin(omega*t)*p*(1-p/k);

    % end

  • Andy Biddulph added an answer:
    How did Schrodinger concluded that adding a complex number to wave function is important? What's the physics behind that?

    The wave function is complex, Why? Can the time and position for elementary particles have a complex relation (transformation) relative to our time and position?

    Andy Biddulph ·

    All this confusion over i, the square root of minus one comes about because we have been taught to regard it as a relative of the unicorn, a mythical magical beast. In reality it comes about by virtue of the anticommutative property of a certain class of multiplication operations. Let a and b be unit quantities and # be an anticommuting multiplication then a#b=i, i2 = -1. There is no scalar i because scalar multiplication commutes. If we find i in an equation we need to find out what it is rather than inventing unicorns. As David Hestenes says, if we can not identify i then the problem is not well formulated. (New Foundation in Classical Mechanics)
    Waves imply rotations in a plane. Planes are described by unit basis vectors via their outer product. Let x, y be unit basis vectors then the unit directed area bivector is x^y=i because the outer product anticommutes. i is called the pseudoscalar of the plane. Rotors are bivectors, ie scalar multiples of i. Willard Gibbs' description of rotations as the cross product of two vectors giving an axial vector, while having the laudable aim of multiplying vectors to get vectors, obscures the geometrical interpretation of i by describing the duel of a bivector rotor. The cross product is normal to the plane of rotation and has the same magnitude as the bivector rotor. The cross product only has meaning in three dimensions and has difficulties describing rotations that are not orthogonal to the direction of motion. A rotor can be described as some scalar multiple of i but it is more convenient to to use the exponential form R = eiA where A is some angle in radians. Thus the geometrical interpretation of Euler's formula eiPI = -1 is the rotation of a vector by PI radians reverses its orientation.
    In general, a wave is a rotor and a direction of motion not in the i plane. This gives a helical wave. To get a plane wave we could project the rotation onto a plane defined by a fixed vector in the i plane and the direction of motion. Alternatively, we can describe a plane wave as the sum of two helical waves, identical except for their handedness. If we call those going in the same orientation as the i plane R = eiA and those with the opposite handedness R* = e-iA we can simply add, W(a plane wave) = R + R* The handedness convention is quite arbitrary. Thus we get a physically meaningful interpretation of negative frequency. Quantum mechanics do like to throw confusing ideas about.
    There is another way of describing the rotation in a plane by the geometrical product ab = a.b + a^b  Which results in the sum of the sum of a scalar plus the scalar multiple of the unit bivector pseudoscalar i This is a spinor z = a + bi A plane wave is thus W = zz* =(a + bi)(a - bi). The wave function is really spinor but we pretend it is a complex vector and write the dot product <z|z*>.
    All of these ideas may also be expressed as tensors and matrices.
    The use of i comes from the basic geometrical fact that a wave is a combination of a rotation in a plane and a linear motion.  Just to add to the fun combinations of rotational motions involves phasors which are spinors with a different name. Beam me up Scotty.All this confusion over i, the square root of minus one comes about because we have been taught to regard it as a relative of the unicorn, a mythical magical beast. In reality it comes about by virtue of the anticommutative property of a certain class of multiplication operations. Let a and b be unit quantities and # be an anticommuting multiplication then a#b=i, i2 = -1. There is no scalar i because scalar multiplication commutes. If we find i in an equation we need to find out what it is rather than inventing unicorns. As David Hestenes says, if we can not identify i then the problem is not well formulated. (New Foundation in Classical Mechanics)
    Waves imply rotations in a plane. Planes are described by unit basis vectors via their outer product. Let x, y be unit basis vectors then the unit directed area bivector is x^y=i because the outer product anticommutes. i is called the pseudoscalar of the plane. Rotors are bivectors, ie scalar multiples of i. Willard Gibbs' description of rotations as the cross product of two vectors giving an axial vector, while having the laudable aim of multiplying vectors to get vectors, obscures the geometrical interpretation of i by describing the duel of a bivector rotor. The cross product is normal to the plane of rotation and has the same magnitude as the bivector rotor. The cross product only has meaning in three dimensions and has difficulties describing rotations that are not orthogonal to the direction of motion. A rotor can be described as some scalar multiple of i but it is more convenient to to use the exponential form R = eiA where A is some angle in radians. Thus the geometrical interpretation of Euler's formula eiPI = -1 is the rotation of a vector by PI radians reverses its orientation.
    In general, a wave is a rotor and a direction of motion not in the i plane. This gives a helical wave. To get a plane wave we could project the rotation onto a plane defined by a fixed vector in the i plane and the direction of motion. Alternatively, we can describe a plane wave as the sum of two helical waves, identical except for their handedness. If we call those going in the same orientation as the i plane R = eiA and those with the opposite handedness R* = e-iA we can simply add, W(a plane wave) = R + R* The handedness convention is quite arbitrary. Thus we get a physically meaningful interpretation of negative frequency. Quantum mechanics do like to throw confusing ideas about.
    There is another way of describing the rotation in a plane by the geometrical product ab = a.b + a^b  Which results in the sum of the sum of a scalar plus the scalar multiple of the unit bivector pseudoscalar i This is a spinor z = a + bi A plane wave is thus W = zz* =(a + bi)(a - bi). The wave function is really spinor but we pretend it is a complex vector and write the dot product <z|z*>.
    All of these ideas may also be expressed as tensors and matrices.
    The use of i comes from the basic geometrical fact that a wave is a combination of a rotation in a plane and a linear motion.  Just to add to the fun combinations of rotational motions involves phasors which are spinors with a different name. Beam me up Scotty.All this confusion over i, the square root of minus one comes about because we have been taught to regard it as a relative of the unicorn, a mythical magical beast. In reality it comes about by virtue of the anticommutative property of a certain class of multiplication operations. Let a and b be unit quantities and # be an anticommuting multiplication then a#b=i, i2 = -1. There is no scalar i because scalar multiplication commutes. If we find i in an equation we need to find out what it is rather than inventing unicorns. As David Hestenes says, if we can not identify i then the problem is not well formulated. (New Foundation in Classical Mechanics)
    Waves imply rotations in a plane. Planes are described by unit basis vectors via their outer product. Let x, y be unit basis vectors then the unit directed area bivector is x^y=i because the outer product anticommutes. i is called the pseudoscalar of the plane. Rotors are bivectors, ie scalar multiples of i. Willard Gibbs' description of rotations as the cross product of two vectors giving an axial vector, while having the laudable aim of multiplying vectors to get vectors, obscures the geometrical interpretation of i by describing the duel of a bivector rotor. The cross product is normal to the plane of rotation and has the same magnitude as the bivector rotor. The cross product only has meaning in three dimensions and has difficulties describing rotations that are not orthogonal to the direction of motion. A rotor can be described as some scalar multiple of i but it is more convenient to to use the exponential form R = eiA where A is some angle in radians. Thus the geometrical interpretation of Euler's formula eiPI = -1 is the rotation of a vector by PI radians reverses its orientation.
    In general, a wave is a rotor and a direction of motion not in the i plane. This gives a helical wave. To get a plane wave we could project the rotation onto a plane defined by a fixed vector in the i plane and the direction of motion. Alternatively, we can describe a plane wave as the sum of two helical waves, identical except for their handedness. If we call those going in the same orientation as the i plane R = eiA and those with the opposite handedness R* = e-iA we can simply add, W(a plane wave) = R + R* The handedness convention is quite arbitrary. Thus we get a physically meaningful interpretation of negative frequency. Quantum mechanics do like to throw confusing ideas about.
    There is another way of describing the rotation in a plane by the geometrical product ab = a.b + a^b  Which results in the sum of the sum of a scalar plus the scalar multiple of the unit bivector pseudoscalar i This is a spinor z = a + bi A plane wave is thus W = zz* =(a + bi)(a - bi). The wave function is really spinor but we pretend it is a complex vector and write the dot product <z|z*>.
    All of these ideas may also be expressed as tensors and matrices.
    The use of i comes from the basic geometrical fact that a wave is a combination of a rotation in a plane and a linear motion.  Just to add to the fun combinations of rotational motions involves phasors which are spinors with a different name. Beam me up Scotty.

  • Sajid Maitla added an answer:
    Which is the best solvent to soak Sephadex LH-20 first time?

    Sephadex LH-20

    Sajid Maitla · Bahauddin Zakariya University

    methanol is the best... you have to soak sephadex LH 20 for 24hrs before column packing. 

  • Wei Hu added an answer:
    What is the advantage of linear time invariant system (LTI)?

    I need to know the difference between non linear LTI and linear LTI.

    Wei Hu · Xiamen University

    @ Abdulmunem

      Ha-ha ~ It is not a miss ,but a mister.Thanks

  • Zahra Zre added an answer:
    How can I analyse my MMT assay data?

    I'm working on 2 cell lines of colon cancer,treating them with 5FU. i've got the results for 4 time periods but i dont know how to analyse them

    Zahra Zre · Kharazmi University

    thanQ :)

  • Jamal Toutouh added an answer:
    Are there any good tools to measure the performance of VANETs?

    802.11 based VANET Performance measurement tools 

    Jamal Toutouh · University of Malaga

    As Rashed Hussain wrote, you can find different simulators to analyze the performance of a VANET. 

    You can use ns-2 simulator and AWK/Python files or ns-3

    If you follow the link, you will find some ns-2 VANET  simulations and the AWK file to evaluate the PDR, end-to-end delay, normalized routing load, and routing path length

  • Dmitri Martila added an answer:
    How do I do the D/M/1 queue service time calculation?

    I am trying to calculate the value for b0 (probability of backoff time counter reaches zero). Could you please let me know what will be the value of service time (mu) and alpha while starting the experiment? 

    Dmitri Martila · University of Tartu

    Hi! Serious research requires serious reward. Be holy. Bye!

  • Andrew Bell added an answer:
    How do I do a test for endogeneity and time invariant independent variable in panel data?

    I am working with panel data where I am estimating a group fixed effects model as I have some time invariant X variables. I need to test for endogeneity? Can anyone tell me how to do this? GMM does not help.

    Andrew Bell · The University of Sheffield

    You may want to have a look at this paper:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233756428

    I think the answer to your question depends on what you mean by 'endogeneity'. If you mean correlation between t-variant variables and (time invariant) random effects in a RE model, then this can be thought of as a result of different 'within' and 'between' effects, and can easily be solved using the Mundlak formulation within the RE framework (see above article), allowing the estimation of your t-invariant variables. This is why the Hausman test is a flawed way of deciding between FE and RE models in my opinion.

    However, if by endogeneity you mean correlations between your residuals and t-invariant variables, that would suggest you have omitted t-invariant variables (individual characteristics). These would make any causal interpretation of your t-invariant variable effects rather unwise. This is rather less easy to test for or fix mechanically, unless you happen to have a good instrumental variable.

    Hope that helps,

    Andy

About Time

The dimension of the physical universe which, at a given place, orders the sequence of events. (McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms, 6th ed)

Topic Followers (576) See all