>>8946304

you're not grasping waves.

'unit circle?'

the circle describes the phase through the use of the sine, and that's about it.

yes, the sine is correct, and a sine will be useful to write equations, but there is nothing about a 'circle' that is inherently abotu 'waves'

the radians of a circle are used to describe the 'phase' of the wave.

the circle is a construction of mind. A wave doesn't have any thing to do with it outside of mind.

vibrations are described by waves. Waves can be described by the phase. A circle can as well.

and the sampling of a signal into a descrete math (how digital sound is made) is done with even samples,

you should read about nyquist frequency and sampling theory, and AM FM and pulse wave modulation.

try to understand discrete transforms.

>>8946471

listen, it's cute you 'splaning stuff that you barely grasp, but it's also painful.

you know one of the most useful rules of science is 'Energy can neither be created nor destroyed' and yet even supposely the most intelligent and well connected scientists forget this.

so what do eht 'orbitals' represent? they represent the amount of energy that is trapped there. And it gets to a 'quiesant' state that, even though the energy is there we don't notice any changes.

And as far as electrons? how do we measure them? we use systems that are created with matter. Matter includes protons. The electron is an effect of measureing things with devices made of protons. We 'see it' through the glasses of proton based matter.

the 'plus' and the 'minus' are always within range, if not they pull harder to regain the ballance.

think of a string for a musical instrument. If the string is attached over a distance and you 'pluck' it the string creates tones. if you learn how that happens, how those reflect, and how that makes sound, and then how that is changed as you 'play' the instrument . . . you will gain a lot of insight into the system.

but these equations are always filled with very many other assumptions. The materials used are abstracted, the reflections of the waves in the string are modeled by math but the real fact: if you pluck harder you get a louder sound. Louder sound?

Conservation of Energy!

now study how length of guitar/piano string produces a different tone. And learn about 'tone' and overtone.

then post back after you've studied this for a time.

and whn you can explain why the 42 Kbaud sampling frequency of CD quality music is a horror to the ears of men and definately dogs, then come back and I'll maybe be interested in seeing your copy pasta.

>>8946505

'sine wave' is defining the origin of the wave in time, and what it's phase is at the start of it. at the 0 time component.

so that means that . . . they would have also have had to have had (have to have had?) cartesian math, and an understanding of 'origin' points.

in fact waves don't really behave like that. And the locatin of an origin is rather arbitrary.

you know they came up with a math about minus infinity and plus infinity to do these transform things. the math basically includes all time. All time! so then they change that math to start at 'time zero'. Again, an arbitrary idea.

waves are all that exist, we know this. 'sine wave' is a concept from mathematics, and music, and it basically . . . is an abstract (but very useful idea) about waves and how to describe them.

but ancients didn't have 'sine waves' as a concept. Maybe starting sometime after Cartesian coordinate systems were crafted?

the idea that equations of x/y of t didn't go back to the begining of time was part of the reason that the wave theory and Laplace transfrom stuff was found to be very useful. If we always have to account for the part of an equation that happens long before we even start thinking about it . . . that's a whole long lot of time.

and then they were like, these math mind people, why don't we just look at the frequency equations and start them at zero time, an abstract time, yes, but more useful than negative infinite time in the past or negative infinite time in the future.

so they started breaking equations down into parts, and understanding when a equation was useful for a period of time.

And still they didn't get that the limits of modeling are such that it must match what is real in the world. or it's not a model but an abstraction of math.

and even though they understood that the model was not the thing, chaos theory didn't start happening until the 1960s: when the system of how much input (energy) was shown that the equation breaks. IE the actual physical system breaks. The 'linear' nature of the system breaks down at high energy input.

It's a veyr simple concept. And yet the models are seen as being the thing, not the actual stuff that is modeled. And eggheads mistake the math for the science.

>>8946572

Fear of the Lord is useful as a first step, and to humble the truculent.

>>8946554

your splurg splaning stuff at a kindergarden level wihtout any real understanding of real world things, and actual physical systems.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. We know this.

all energy in will still be there at the end of the process.

So if energy can neither be created nor destroyed then we have a set amount of E that is a constant for the whole universe!

so all we can do is move the energy around. And then what happens?

it's always ringing in some sense.

to play a guitar we pluck the strings. The strings will then resonate depending on the physical configuration, and we can use the ideas of resonance to echo that, and we get what is called a 'system function', in a mathematical sense, but 'music' in a musical sense.

Resonance is combination of all the echoing, and the combing effect of the cancelation as the sound gets directed back (or vibration) is how something is 'tuned'. not just for music but for stuff and objects.

that's why a singer can break a glass like the glyph in your image shows.

>>8946540

>(You)

>>8946620

it's obvious that your a spurgey shill trying to make a slide when you give out basic information but it's just wrong.

>>8946669

is this the ancient gawd of blunder, Bhor? with his magic Sparking Sizzers?

>>8946718

The genius of Tesla is undesputed, as is also the genius of . . . Thermal Dynamics.

I don't think you can survive this one. Go back and reread your Thermal Dynamics text book.

>>8946752

no, that's incorrect.

the laws are based upon scientific observation.

how all the stuff got created and where it came from? that's outside of it.

when did it start?

if God exists outside of time why did the universe ever have to start at all?

start implies a time based system.

the cringe shift junior larpers try to slide all day.

they have no idea it's all been done before.

they'll get it in time wiht loving rebuke, and go MAGA

before it's too late,

convert their own countries back to being civil

and stop their endless neighsaying quibble (big ouch!)

>>8946855

I get chatty when I'm rested.

Cringe shift is full of larpers.

they are splaning existence this morning.

the cringe shift 'we must act' anon is doing teh collective 'we' and telling us how we 'must' behave.

I have a much stronger ability to scroll right by that kind of thing lately. The form of it is with a 'you' at the start, looking for suggestible people. And they make a bold explanation, that is made up (in that smear and cast into hell thing of the supremicist when they are sure they don't like you) and the say 'as you are this superior being which I am suggesting, watch the hypnotic ball, then you must do this heroic thing that I suggest. and then they suggest nonsense that will make you look foolish if you do it. You know this?

or is this me doing what they do? or me warning you about something?

they tell you what you are in flatery and then say you must do something you'd never do otherwise (without their suggestion) to keep this aspect of flattery current or you aren't that (they take away their loving stroke of ego-feed).

yes, cringe shift.

if they don't like you they say 'I see how you are you are like the worst now I will do to you what was done to them , send you to a hell of my own making'.

you grow your universe in a closed jar of mind, but the jar is cracked and all the liquid leaks out and it looks like you pissed yourself . . .

>>8946950

you state a lie to justify

the brutality of the evil

in fact if we don't say 'no' it's not approval at all.

why do you say this lie?

>>8946971

obviously it was purposeful shilling.

when someone says 'here look at this horid image that no one should ever see' are you not aware that they are the one furthering the horror.

they can do a 'what me?' bit, but that's still them being a vicious shill.

>>8946984

It's common to write a program to translate one type of code into another type. You 'wrap' it.

so you can take text and wrap it and make colored letters.

or learn about what is called 'game logic'. you can make your objects interact. They 'write their own' response based upon rules you provide.