Sentences with phrase «simple derivation»

In 2.3 gravity is added to a non-isothermal gas column and this condition is theoretically justified — it is pretty simple derivation, I recommend it.

Simple derivation of the special theory of relativity without the speed of light axiom 2 1.

The name Bharatanatyam is a simple derivation from the four most important aspects of dance (in Sanskrit).

My starting point in explicating M's theory is to come up with a reasonably accurate but much simpler derivation of «tau».

Not exact matches

Rather than, as usual, assign the hybrid prehension of God to the first phase, with the conceptual derivation in the second phase (which would deprive the initial phase of simple physical feeling of any guidance by the subjective aim), we should think of these two terms as referring to the same feeling.

Classicists will at once recognize this derivation from the simple fact that the last principal part of the verb educare is educatum, while that of the verb educare is educatum; hence, we have «education,» not «eduction.»

The species are related to one another by derivation: the later, more complex life forms are derived from earlier, more simple life forms.

Most new designs are evolutions or derivations of what came before, with little variations in details, maybe as simple as integrating separate trunks into the body form, as was done in the early 1930s, or adding fins to enveloping shapes, as was done to the point of absurdity in the»50s.

These punchy accounts of youth hockey matches and other pivotal events are generated, Hammond told us, by «a simple set of derivations from the data.»

But the show also examined the colors themselves, in works that explored the palette or derivations from the palette seen in the deceptively simple Kelly wall sculpture.

ER1: «The derivation of size the of the greenhouse effect is very simple, and takes about half a page in an atmospheric science text.»

The derivation of size the of the greenhouse effect is very simple, and takes about half a page in an atmospheric science text.

For in it we merely introduced and explained our simple model, setting out in detail the origin or derivation of each equation and the appropriate interval for each relevant parameter, and supporting and illuminating our methodology and conclusions with almost 60 references to previously - published reviewed papers in the learned journals of climatology.

Here is a link to this simple model's derivation worksheet (fyi: the «saved version» has annual rate - of - rise at 3.0 ppm):

Things get very difficult, very fast, though, which is why most people stop with the simple semi-heuristic derivation of the DALR in spite of the fact that its idealizations aren't very good and it at best gives you insight and conceptual power to make estimates and develop rules of thumb, not so much provide strong predictive power in atmospheric dynamics.

If you visit page 85 (section 9.2) of my online book on electrodynamics, you can actually follow the full derivation of the transmission and reflection coefficients, although they only have a relatively simple form for light coming in at right angles.

The complexity and non-linearity of the climate system does not allow such a simple statistical derivation of climate sensitivity without a physical understanding of the key processes and feedbacks.

Another derivation is by the astronomer Herschel (1850) who got the Gaussian from simple assumptions on measurement error.

Beyond the formal derivation using the Virial Theorem, the factor of (2/3) can be proven by direct calculation of [KE] and [PE] for simple models such as the isothermal perfect gas or, with more difficulty, the adiabatic perfect gas.

For instance, Sloan and Wolfendale (2013) demonstrated how an elegant physics - based derivation leads to a simple equation describing the radiative fluxes involved in the GHE, explaining why the radiative forcing is proportional to ln (ρ), where ρ is the density of GHGs in parts per volume.

I think this could be another reason why the derivation of the IPCC's formula for radiative forcing from CO2 offered by Bindidon is not valid, since that derivation involves the assumption that our estimate of the global mean surface temperature can be converted directly into an estimate of global mean surface radiance by a simple application of the Stefan - Boltzman formula, which you have pointed out is not necessarily true.