#formulas

[kattypulsar]

https://www.facebook.com/61573720163498

[marcustumblerius]

[stemwithjoricanka]

Did I find a book with all formulas in math, physics and chemistry?

Of course I did.

Did I find in German language?

Of course.

Do I know any word in German language?

Nope, but I still buy it.

[namesnamesandmorenames]

So I updated my fanfiction databases like an insane amount since the last time I posted about it it includes having I think two more databases- One for stats and one for reading logs because I want to be able to more accurately say when I'm reading and how much I'm reading at a time because I read a lot of wips--

but the stats one is the one that I want to talk about because obviously yeah things are based on statistics and therefore averages and medians and whatever. But it's crazy to me that I gave right a formula that's like hey, this fic is about 12,644 words-- It'll probably take you 33 minutes to read it. And then I'll be exactly right! Like yeah obviously it's math apparently at my like average reading speed is around 385-390 wpm but I have the like estimated page numbers in my database which is just actually complete bull because it's me trying to estimate how many words are on a page but like sometimes a page has more dialogue. Sometimes I'm reading a text fic that'll be like insanely longer technically because there's so few words on each page but I can't really account for that in the formula-- that is not the case with words per minute because that is like straight data and every single reading log that I create adds to the data so it just gets more accurate the more I read!

[er-cryptid]

Arrhenius Equation [Ex. 2]

Patreon

[techalertr]

Trace Precendent | Trace Dependent in MS Excel | Tips and Tricks MS Excel https://youtu.be/ooZ920DbXhM

#TechAlert #excel #msexceltraining #instagram #tipsandtricks #tips #Microsoft #msexceltips #formulas #trending #traceprecedent #tracedependent #Office #MSOffice

[math-see]

Tuesday observation:

Do you see it? It looks like mathematical ghosts. I wanted to look outside through the glass wall, but there are formulas flying in front of my eyes.

The design of the mathematical institute of Orsay makes you see some mathematics in transparent.

[reno-matagot]

Daily Devotions

𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒕𝒐𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝑷𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒏𝒊𝒖𝒎! 𝑨𝒈𝒊𝒐𝒔 𝑶𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒐𝒎𝒐𝒔-𝑫𝒓𝒂𝒌𝒐𝒔𝒐𝒑𝒉𝒊𝒂!

𝑳𝒊𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝑻𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑽𝒆𝒇𝒂 𝑾𝒆𝒉𝒍𝒊𝒄 𝑩𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒂𝒍

𝑻𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑹𝒆𝒎𝒆 𝑳𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒔 𝑺𝒂𝒕𝒂𝒏 ~ 𝑨𝒗𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒔!

𝑹𝒆𝒏𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝑽𝒊𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑨𝒗𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝑳𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝑳𝒊𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒉

𝑹𝒆𝒏𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝑻𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑼𝒃𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒂 𝑩𝒊𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑰𝒄𝒂𝒓 𝑳𝒖𝒄𝒊𝒇𝒆𝒓!

𝑬𝒍𝒂𝒏 𝑻𝒚𝒑𝒂𝒏 𝑽𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒆!

𝑺𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒂 𝑨𝒍𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝑹𝒐𝒔𝒊𝒆𝒓 𝑨𝒌𝒆𝒏

𝑴𝒆𝒈𝒊𝒔𝒕 𝑨𝒃𝒓𝒂𝒔𝒂𝒙 𝑮𝒍𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒂 !

𝑱𝒆𝒅𝒆𝒏 𝑬𝒕 𝑹𝒆𝒏𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝑺𝒆𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝑻𝒖 𝑻𝒂𝒔𝒂 !

𝑳𝒚𝒂𝒏 𝑹𝒂𝒎𝒆𝒄 𝑪𝒂𝒕𝒚𝒂 𝒁𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓

𝑨𝒗𝒆 𝑶𝒎𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒆𝒏𝒔 𝑼𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒂, 𝑫𝒆𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒔 𝑴𝒂𝒈𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒆

𝑰𝒂 𝑵𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒉𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒂

𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒗𝒆𝒕𝒆 𝑨𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒅𝒊𝒂𝒔 𝒆𝒕 𝑳𝒂𝒚𝒊𝒍𝒆𝒍!

[ Astrological / Demons]

𝒀𝒂 𝑵𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒔𝒉 𝑺𝒊𝒕𝒓𝒂 𝑫𝒆 -𝑺𝒎𝒐𝒍𝒂 𝑨𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒐𝒔 𝑫𝒓𝒂𝒌𝒐𝒔𝒐𝒑𝒉𝒊𝒂 𝑬𝒙𝒂𝒕!

Source: Complete Book of Demonolatry (S.Connoly) &

[themagicflower]

[acostumbradoalfindelmundo]

Majareta

Mi cordura hace tiempo que ya no sostiene el peso aplastante que me rodea. Hizo alianza con la locura porque necesita refuerzos, tropas aliadas, municiones inconexas, sinapsis de escapatoria que excaven túneles aleatorios, como los algoritmos entrópicos que mueven cada lámpara de lava. Hace meses que se me terminó el año, y no sé como vivir este limbo en el que quedé atrapado, regando todas las semanas plantas que se niegan a conversar conmigo. Por momentos me sorprende la razón. No la mía, la de lxs demás, entra sin avisar, tiene llave propia, un imparable tsunami de sentido común con fórmulas, usos, costumbres y soluciones infalibles para vidas prefabricadas. Les respondo que no hay repuestos para lo que se me rompió, no escuchan e insisten en venderme sus piezas. “Son universales” afirman lxs vendedorxs “sirven para todxs, también para vos”. Ya compré cuando era más ingenuo que loco y me cagaron (es más fácil engañar a la inocencia que a la incoherencia), así llegué a este punto, por usar componentes de otras vidas que no fueron pensados para la mía. Fue entonces cuando decidí trepar a la luna usando sus rayos como cuerda. Allá arriba encontré vodka, hielo para congelar mis ideas y fuego para incinerar mi contaminación de coherencia, pesa un montón y no me sirve para nada más que para caminar más lento mientras me susurra direcciones de lugares que no me abren las puertas. Hoy evito las horas en que los girasoles se mueven, me pregunto qué ofendió a las plantas, meo con viento a favor, cago en los baños de humildad, nado en la nada, busco motivaciones mudas (sin frases), y sobre todo jamás (JAMÁS) veo señales en ningún lado. Si encuentro alguna coincidencia con el universo, discrepo. El problema de la locura no es la locura, es a donde apunta. Por eso ahora entro por las ventanas y sigo únicamente la dirección de brújulas rotas.

Acostumbradoalfindelmundolandia: linktr.ee/acostumbradoalfindelmundo

[leregirenga]

No existen métodos, formulas o primicias para el amor. Se da de corazón a corazón, de alma a otra alma, de miradas, detalles, hechos... Son dos seres que se ven y se crea alquimia, con un poco de sorpresa, con un tanto de ternura, con cariño del bueno y crece como flor, cómo girasol que con la luz del sol, brota magnífico y abierto a la vida.

Leregi Renga

[ajackofthecraftsandamasterofnone]

Wax and F.O. Measurement Formula

I got this from Armatage Candle Company and Memory Box Candle Co who helped clarify it. It works for me as long as I remember to take out the container weight when I do my math.

1)Take note of the container's weight. (This is just good to have especially if you forget to zero out the scale).

2) Place the container on the scale and zero it out.

3) Add water and record the weight. (Fill the container based on how much wax you would want in said container).

4) Multiply the water weight by 0.86g. This will give you the weight of the wax. (We'll also be working in grams throughout this). At this point if you aren't adding any fragrance oil then you can use this number to make your candle/embeds/waxmelts.

For adding Fragrance Oil

5) Net weight divided by ((100%) + (FO%)) = the wax weight needed. The net weight is the wax weight we calculated in step 4. The FO% is the percentage of Fragrance Oil you want to add to your candle. Typically candles and waxmelts have an FO% of either 6%, 8%, 10%, or 12%.

The smaller the percentage just means there is less fragrance oil to burn. This doesn't mean that scent will be weaker just that it doesn't last as long. Think of it like putting gas in your car. Putting a small amount of gas in your car doesn't make it go slower, just means you won't be able to drive as far/long as you would on a full tank of gas.

With that in mind, don't add too much fragrance oils to your candle. You run the risk of it not being fully incorporated into the wax causing leaking or oil pockets. So like salad dressing that's been sitting for a while, the excess fragrance oil will separate from the wax. And consider F.O. is very flammable if someone light their candle and there is F.O. sitting on top of the candle or an oil pocket beneath the surface, it could cause the flame to get outta control when the fire touches the oil. Which is not good. So anyways,

6) Net weight divided by (106%) = the wax weight needed. (For this we are just using an FO% of 6%).

7) Once you have the wax weight needed you can calculate the FO weight needed. Which is the Net weight - wax weight needed = FO weight needed.

Example!

We have a 12oz candle with a water weight of 395g. And we want to make a full candle with a fragrance load of 8%.

water weight: 395g FO%: 8%

395g * 0.86 = 339.7g Let's round up to 340g!

Net weight: 340g FO %: 8%

340g divided by ((100%) + (8%)) = wax weight needed

340g divided by (108%) = wax weight needed

314.81g Lets round up -> 315g = wax weight needed

Now for the F.O.

Net weight - Wax weight needed = FO weight needed

340g - 315g = 25g

25g = FO weight needed.

So, you need 315g of wax and 25g of fragrance oil to make one, 12oz candle.

[ailurinae]

Ok, but like. What are s and d measuring?

Like number of children is fine. Age is in years presumably.

Area of garden... probably is in m^2

But what is "size of egg" and "depth of undergrowth"? The most common egg sizes are how the cartons are labeled (at least in the US) "medium" "large" "extra large", etc. but those labels are useful for a numeric formula.

The USDA official sizes are evidently:

(by the dozen)

Small: 18 ounces (about 1.5 ounce per egg)

Medium: 21 ounces (about 1.75 ounce per egg)

Large: 24 ounces (about 2 ounces per egg)

Extra-Large: 27 ounces (about 2.25 ounces per egg)

Jumbo: 30 ounces (about 2.5 ounces per egg)

So are we using 18/21/24/27/30 ? or the per egg size? or something else altogether? Are there similar standard sizes in grams for say, the EU? (there are (pdf))

Even more troublesome is the "depth of undergrowth". We say stuff like "deep in the undergrowth", so it feels right to say that, but what does it mean?

One possibility might be something like "distance from edge of path or other clear area to midpoint or to edge of fence-line/boundary". Though even then you'd have to take an average or something? But I think it should also include something about density of foliage/flowers / how much they screen the ground. Like a couple rows of tulips hides a lot less than some densely packed plants with spreading leaves low to the ground, right? So I think "d" is the result of a whole formula itself including somehow distance and % coverage. Though whatever it is, it is added to area, not multiplied or divided or such, so not *too* much of an impact, compared to what it could be...

Now I didn't do a bunch of different attempts with different values, just a few, but I think regardless of assumptions we could plug in for s and d, the formula quickly falls apart except for a few specific ranges (*what ranges* being different depending on assumptions for s and d). But it's pretty easy to get huge numbers of eggs and eggs per child.

Happy Easter! from me and New Scientist

[gordonstanheight]

this is kind of my favorite genre of image ever. like THIS is what the internet is for

[er-cryptid]

Horizontal Translation of Logarithmic Functions

-- Formulae: -> g(x) = logb (x + c) -> g(x) = logb (x - c)

-- g(x) = logb (x + c) shifts the graph of f(x) = logb (x) to the left c units and moves the vertical asymptote to x = -c

-- g(x) = logb (x - c) shifts the graph of f(x) = logb (x) to the right c units and moves the vertical asymptote to x = c

.

Patreon