You must always set the right purpose/question for the study - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Here's an example of the exact wording: "Determine the point at which the intercepted aircraft will be in the time it takes for me (the missile) to reach the same point, with the aircraft maintaining the same speed and direction as at the moment of calculation". That is what exactly three-dimensional space and also time have to do with it, i.e. four-dimensional space and therefore a point is needed. Although. Here too, it is possible and necessary (in reality) to do not with a point. But in theory by a point. This is a clear formulation.
Mum... That's something! ... For eighth grade? :))
Miracle, that's a tough one. Try solving it. ha ha.
My God, where did Reshetov go? How he liked to call such smart guys as underachievers and other right words. He would have explained to you, illiterate, what it is. And now I have to do this silly business - eradicating illiteracy among the illiterate. How old are you, boy? You gonna be in the eighth grade in ten years?
.
In your "exact statement" I've underlined words in bold, from which it follows that the plane up to the meeting point will move straight and uniformly (for dullards: speed is conserved, i.e. V=const - uniform motion; direction is conserved, i.e. the trajectory is a straight line). The coordinates of the aircraft's position at the initial moment of time and its velocity are known. The coordinates of the meeting point are unknown (x,y,z). If the plane is moving uniformly and in a straight line, the missile can also fly in a straight line. The initial position and speed of the missile are also known. The flight time of the plane and the missile to the rendezvous point is the same, we may denote it by t.
Let us denote by x1,y1,z1 the initial coordinates of the plane; V1x,V1y,V1z the components of the plane velocity vector along (x,y,z) axes;
similarly, x2,y2,z2 are the initial coordinates of the missile; V2x,V2y,V2z are the components of the missile's velocity vector along the (x,y,z) axes.
We have the equations of rectilinear motion of the plane up to a point (x,y,z)
x = x1 + t*V1x
y = y1 + t*V1y
z = z1 + t*V1z
similarly, the equations for straight-line motion of the rocket to a point (x,y,z)
x = x2 + t * V2x, where V2x = V2 * cos(a), i.e. x = x2 + t * V2 * cos(a)
y = y2 + t * V2y, where V2y = V2 * cos(b), that is, y = y2 + t * V2 * cos(b);
z = z2 + t * V2z, where V2z = V2 * cos(c), i.e. z = z2 + t * V2 * cos(c);
The components of the missile's velocity vector are actually unknown, since the direction in which the missile has to be launched to collide with the aircraft is unknown. Only the value of the missile's velocity V2 is known. So, the components of velocity vector are written through the value of V2 and cosines of angles of vector V2 to axes (x,y,z).
Thus, we have 6 equations relative to 7 unknowns - three required coordinates x,y,z, time of approach t and three angles for the missile a,b,c.
So, maths expert, do you know where to get the 7th equation from? I don't think so. You'd have to know geometry, and you don't know anything else but maths.
Equation 7 is basically Pythagoras' theorem for 3-dimensional space. Written in cosines, it looks like this:
(cos(a))^2 + (cos(b))^2 + (cos(c))^2 = 1
That's it, kid, 7 equations, 7 unknowns. Solves it in the best way. You end up with the coordinates of the rendezvous point, the time, and even the direction for the rocket. That's a lot more than you asked. Come on, learn while you're young.
.
So, darling, this task is "difficult" only for you. So if you want to see a miracle, look in the mirror.
By the way, maybe you know how to program? Or a successful forex trader? It could happen. You don't need to know maths or physics at all. But, believe me, even if it's true, it doesn't mean that you're one iota better than the newest rookie, or even the crappiest sucker, not only on this forum, but in life in general. So get your puckered lip up, stop trying to impress whoever it is that's on here, and for God's sake stay out of places where you don't know the first thing about.
By the way, for everyone.
The prescribed topic is a very interesting one. You don't have to wait for the topic to have something meaningful to say about it. We can discuss it as it is. If there are others who would like to speak out.
By the way, for everyone.
The prescribed topic is a very interesting one. You don't have to wait for the topic to have something meaningful to say about it. We can discuss it as it is. If someone wants to speak up.
Yurixx, what do you have to say about my two posts on page 1? About the patterns. Please comment on them.
My God, where did Reshetov go? How he liked to call such smart guys "losers" and other right words. He would have explained to you, an illiterate, what it is. And now I have to do this silly business - eradicating illiteracy among the illiterate. How old are you, boy? You gonna be in the eighth grade in ten years?
.
In your "exact statement" I've underlined words in bold, from which it follows that the plane up to the meeting point will move straight and uniformly (for dullards: speed is conserved, i.e. V=const - uniform motion; direction is conserved, i.e. the trajectory is a straight line). The coordinates of the aircraft's position at the initial moment of time and its speed are known. The coordinates of the meeting point are unknown (x,y,z). If the plane is moving uniformly and in a straight line, the missile can also fly in a straight line. The initial position and speed of the missile are also known. The time of flight of the plane and the missile to the meeting point is the same, we can denote it by t.
So, dear, this problem is "difficult" only for you. So, if you want to see a miracle, look in the mirror.
By the way, maybe you know how to program? Or a successful forex trader? It could happen. You don't need to know maths or physics at all. But, believe me, even if it's true, it doesn't mean that you're one iota better than the newest rookie, or even the crappiest sucker, not only on this forum, but in life in general. So get your puckered lip up, stop trying to impress whoever you're trying to impress, and for God's sake don't go where you don't know the first thing about.
:) First of all, it's an example for people like you who don't know how to formulate.
And secondly - Miracle, what if the plane does turn? What if the wind does? What if the mass of the rocket changes? What if the density of the air changes? And if you count like that in forex, that's fine. :)
And third, if the speed of a missile is only 100 km per hour faster than an aeroplane.
And fourth, :))) there is the attraction of the earth :)) What you have frightfully cleverly postulated - it refers to the cosmos :))) The earth, its gravity is not taken into account.
Where does it say that the speed of a rocket does not change? :))
Fifth :))) The Earth is round - you have to count in the right coordinate system, and in relation to the rocket. :)
Read the list of coordinate systems.
This problem must also be solved in instantaneous coordinates and velocities. IN MOMENTARY, so I see. :)
So here's an example of how a misconstrued problem can be solved in the wrong way.
Mda.a.a.a.a.a...... And on this forum they tried to ban me for FLOOD !(said for 30 days, turned out to be 3 hours, ban removed). Then what should be done to the members of this thread for all of the above???
The truth is that any programmer, including programmers in MQL, for relaxation and relaxation of nervous and intellectual tension (which is caused by any programming) regularly and periodically need to discuss frivolously any ideas that come to mind. This is usually called chattering or flooding. But it's needed too!
On the subject: it's true that 50% of any science is spent trying to answer the question of "what do we all do?
The question in the title is nothing more than a variation on that. And it's important. Carry on, s'il vous plaît. Go on... until we all get banned here by the sad moderators, annoyed by the constant pre-release testing of MT5.
Yurixx, what do you have to say about my two posts on page 1? About the patterns. Please comment on them.
That's what you answered, Yuri's right. :)
No, the topic is really serious, colleagues. And it doesn't matter who brought it up.
S, perhaps you could say something on the subject yourself? You asked me to say something about the second cow in the thread - so I tried to develop the subject. Well, you try too, why are you meddling in higher matters? I'm sure he meant something serious. Like, you're all fools here, you meddle in all sorts of Fourier, nerve networks, and you do not really know what you're doing. Do you or don't you?
No, the topic is indeed interesting, colleagues. And it doesn't matter who brought it up.
S, perhaps you could say something on the subject yourself? You asked me to say something about the second cow in the thread - so I tried to develop the subject. Well, you try too, why are you meddling in higher matters? I'm sure you had something serious to say.
No, you're like this.... "like it doesn't matter who picked it up" ! :) ... What's not important to say? :)) We're already... :) like, we'll probably just fuck off home again :)
Yeah, we already have.
:)
What is the right question to ask :
want to make money on the forex?
want to win money with forex ?
(we are not from the area, me and my brother pocket with the money wiped out by an electric train, help anyone who can throw a winning no-earning strategy) :o)
They say you're all fools, you get into all sorts of Fourier and nerves, but you don't really know what you're doing. Do you or don't you?
>>)). Why?
Fourier as I've seen it applied here is wrong, out of place. Neuro grids are overkill, and it's not necessary. :))
:) That's what I've always said.