I shared once with RG “user care” two requests: (1) a function to achieve threads so that one can “stop” a thread he /she initiated without losing thankfully shared contributions as would be the case if she/he deleted the thread. (2) an advanced search function that can ease “navigating” within a thread once it becomes “hard to handle”. I hope “they” are checking posts where “Researchgate” occurs and can have an idea about the relevance of those requests. In another thread I was forced to copy the whole thread in a one html file with an embedded little search function so that new contributors could have an idea about former contributions before adding their own ones. I can do the same here if I’m asked to. Anyhow, “only the most popular and the most recent posts” doesn’t fairly summarize the thread.

I believe, that high power laser diode would be the best solution. Cograts for nice idea of your experimental system! Greetings.

Also depending on you conditions the following article may be of interest by Kerick et al. It discusses EEG artifact during riding in a vehicle type environment and during walking running and standing: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235036375_Assessment_of_EEG_Signal_Quality_in_Motion_Environments?ev=prf_pub Our group has several other artifact articles as well - you can looking in our 2013 "real-world neurotic aging technologies" paper for a review.

Another feature that can matter is pointing accuracy: I once used a (robotic) telescope whose pointing accuracy was poor enough that you had to take a preliminary exposure or two and compare to a finder chart. This obviously limits the possibilities for unattended operation (though if I recall correctly there are automated tools that will take a sky picture with a decent number of stars and tell you where it was pointed).

I think that a student's attitude to higher mathematics is highly influenced by their primary school experience. Compared to most other subjects, mathematics is a gradual learning process based on progressive reasoning. If you don't grasp the basics, then the next steps will be difficult if not impossible to comprehend at any age. One "bad" mathematics teacher can destroy the appreciation of order and beauty in mathematical reasoning and the development of sequential processes. The only way to "re-program" such a mind is to start from scratch and quickly build up their confidence. It happened to me. With a little tuition, my grades went from 45% to 98% in a matter of months. We always enjoy what we can do well. The passion for mathematics develops when there is a history of being successful after each small step and helped along until each step has been completed with confidence. Arts students should envisage mathematics as both a universal language and a tool for calculation. Never assume a student knows anything until proven ;)

So going back to the spirit of my original question: can we have a superposition of mass? If not, why not?

@Cyril. I have only just seen your original question and have not had time to read the long discussion. But I'll will just give you my simple view. The first thing I do when teaching this to students is that I tell them to forget the phrase "virtual ground." I tell them it is bad terminology and misleading. I tell them the phrase I prefer to use is "virtual short" because that is what is really happening. This is much better terminology because your (+) terminal of your op-amp can be at any voltage V, and your (-) terminal will then be approximately equal to V. V does not have to be zero! So the word "ground" is nonsense for this phenomenon. In the negative feedback configuration the difference in these two voltages is made small by the high A. Now, your original question asks if it is a property of the op-amp itself or the configuration. I would say both. Because the high A is a property of the op-amp and the fact that the difference voltage is amplified is a property of the op-amp. But the fact that you get to divide the output voltage by A to get the small input difference voltage is a property of the configuration. I have not seen a configuration without negative feedback that gives you the "virtual short." I would certainly be surprised if you proved one existed :-)

The force of gravity establishes a tensor between kinetic energy at terminal velocity (the Bessel function after acceleration) and isostatic deceleration which transforms the kinetic value to the heat value and potential energy. grav f ( e ) d e = exp g ( x ) d x . k acc y ( E ) d y = lim x ( e ) d e . c vel t ( E ) d t = lim r ( y ) d y . h dec n ( E ) d n = lim y ( Z ) d N .

Gilles, you are right with your evaluation. Unfortunately there are still a few problems related to the question of Shaopeng... - (this gets me usually quite angry) people should learn how to write that surname.. it is SCHERRER, for ** sake. * that formula is almost 100 years old and it is quite likely that in those years the community has answered most questions about it. This is the case: Scherrer formula can provide some qualitative estimation of the (coherently scattering) domain size to be employed for comparison. Using it for a quantitative microstructure analysis of a nanosized powder is definitely absurd (and this has been proven several times. Quick check at the hypotheses behind Scherrer equation and this is clear. So to go back to the question of Shaopeng: - Scherrer formula is better suited in the form that considers the integral breadth more than the FWHM (following the idea of von Laue) - you should consider all reflections when doing a microstructure analysis by XRD (a single peak does not provide any useful information). For several reasons it is better if the lattice is known. Therefore you should know where (more or less) to expect the presence of peaks (such as the doublet you show). - tails of broad peaks are ALWAYS superimposed (even in cases not as extreme as the one you show). If you "fit the peaks" you already force a model to your data (s you extract information from the width of that fitted peak and not from the data itself). - most people don't even consider the presence of the Ka doublet when doing a Scherrer analysis... - proper analysis should be done using the whole pattern and using appropriate microstructure models (to take any anisotropy into account). So the suggestion of Gilles to employ the Rietveld method is only partly correct. The Rietveld method is NOT tuned for microstructure analysis, especially for nanosized systems. Peak functions are developed to get the area of the peaks correct for structure refinement. The microstructure broadening models are either obsolete, undocumented or too rough. Thing works well for coarse grains (where you can use those models in an effective way) but can be wrong for domains of a few nm average size. Moreover the Rietveld method can be in some cases too strict (you have a forcing of a structure model to the data) and in some others not useful (if the structure is not known). You can in any case obtain information on size and strain effects using the Whole Powder Pattern Modelling, currently the state of the art reciprocal space alternative to the Rietveld method for microstructure analysis.. and have most of the problems (microstructure models, peak overlapping, instrumental function, emission profile) taken into account in an appropriate way

Energy is measured by kinetic, temperature, heat, and potential. h ( int , kin ) v ( E ) d E = par f ( e ) d e . c int t ( E ) d v = s s y ( t ) d N d Z . h pot x ( E ) d x = s s r ( q ) d N d Z . mat E ( x ) d x = ( v , t ; h , y ) .

Though I might throw in the odd personal speculation, my general approach is scientific. In order not to seem unreasonable, I often have the task of finding corroborative remarks. Here the following passage may be relevant, with respect to science in general as well as evolutionary theory: "Many Darwin-dreaders missed the point (deliberately?) when I introduced…Darwin’s dangerous idea in 1995. I went to some lengths to reassure my readers that after [this] universal acid swept through their favorite topics-ethics, art, culture, religion, humor, and yes, even consciousness-what would be left behind would be just as wonderful, even more wonderful in many regards, but subtly transformed. Darwin’s idea is a revolutionary idea, no doubt about it, but it does not destroy what we value in all these things; it puts them on better foundations, and unites them gracefully with the rest of knowledge. For centuries “the arts and humanities” have been considered not just separate from the sciences but somehow protected from the invasive examinations science engages in, but this traditional isolation is not the best way to preserve what we love. Trying to hide our treasures behind a veil of mystery prevents us from finding a proper anchoring for them in the physical world. It is a common-enough mistake, especially in philosophy." Dennett, p. 203-4. 2013 Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking

they usually do not absorb well in the UV except for hystidine, tyrosine alanine and tryptophan. For them no single/common peak

Tapio, Come now! What 'arbitrary references' are you referring to - the one that is entitled "Strong Lensing by Galaxies"? Do you have some specific words of wisdom you can pass along about galactic gravitational lensing that would be helpful? Any real 'corrections' with reference sources, rather than abject dismissals and pontifications? You Sir, are no role model of mine, 'real scientist' or not! I sincerely apologize to anyone interested in the subject of this posting for these digressions!

I preserve fungi in distilled water at 4°C. A mycologist told me that it is possible to leave fungi in this condition at rool temperature. We had good yield.

That's a very interesting idea. Some work has been done in this area, check out the following paper from NIME that did something like this. I found 13 papers that cite this in Google Scholar, that would be a good place to start. Hornof, A., & Sato, L. (2004, June). EyeMusic: making music with the eyes. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on New interfaces for musical expression (pp. 185-188). National University of Singapore.

Dear Fatih: Understood - but still remains thought-provoking given how few interventions have achieved significant benefit. Thanks again! Constantine

Thank you Matthijs Dorst and Mauro Carbone.

Virginia, thank you for your valuable comments. I will recommend our music therapist to get in contact with you, just to exchange some thoughts before she starts the project in our hospital.

I would definitely also check that your assay buffer is not causing an issue, I know of colleagues who also have had problems caused by RIPA buffer interfering with the BCA reagent.

Organic mater is very important part for doing soil reclamation, but if it is available top soil even less, then you need to find the best pioneer plant that can grow in such condition. It would be the best way to apply liquid organic fertilizer (LOB) containing PGPR that can survive and support plant growth. It would also be useful if you could ad small amount of humic acid in the LOB.