readings - Appending 内 to a company name is read ない or うち?

For example, if I say マイクロソフト内のパートナーシップは強いです, is the 内 here read as うち or ない?

Answer

「内」 in the form:

「Proper Noun + 内」

is always read 「ない」. I just could not think of an exception to this "rule".

thermodynamics - Does all processes that consume energy from outside result in negative entropy change?

In any spontaneous process entropy increases.In biological systems disordered elements are converted into highly ordered tissues etc(-ve entropy change) which make up living organisms. But, it requires energy from the sun(ultimately). So,does that mean all processes that consume energy from outside result in negative entropy change? Endothermic reactions consume energy in the form of heat from outside so, is all endothermic reactions causing the entropy to decrease?

Answer

Entropy increases in a spontaneous evolution of an isolated system… other than that, there is no general law on the evolution of entropy.

---

does that mean all processes that consume energy from outside result in negative entropy change?

No. When you heat a solid, it increases its entropy.

endothermic reactions causing the entropy to decrease?

Endothermic reactions which cause entropy to decrease have both ∆H positive and ∆S negative, so they will have a positive ∆G, i.e. their are not thermodynamically favorable.

grammar - Help with には and にとって

I need help understanding why にとって cannot be used in this circumstance:

その仕事は私｛には/*にとって｝出来ない。 ( * denotes unacceptable)

This is what I read:

にとって cannot be used when it marks an experiencer or agent

But I get confused when this sentence is acceptable:

これは我々にとって無視できない問題だ。

Isn't 我々 an agent? 我々 is the one who is doing the ignoring right? So what am I understanding wrongly?

Answer

にとって 'As from the point of view of ' is a sentence modifier. The sentence has to be meaningful without it, and it implies that its truth depends on whose point of view it is described from.

これは(無視できない)問題だ

'This is a(n) (unignorable) problem.'

我我にとって、これは(無視できない)問題だ
'For us, this is a(n) (unignorable) problem.'

これは、我我にとって、(無視できない)問題だ　　[これは can be moved to the front.]
'Regarding this, from the point of view of us, it is a(n) (unignorable) problem.'

に in question here is a dative case marker, which optionally marks the subject of the embedded clause of a potential verb.

我我がこれを無視する
'We ignore this.'

[我我{が/に}これを無視]できる　[する is deleted before できる due to the irregularity of potential form.]
'It is possible that we ignore this.'

これは、我我{が/に}無視できる　　[これは can be topicalized and moved to the front.]
'Regarding this, it is possible that we ignore it.'

As usual in Japanese, the subject can be omitted, and be understood implicitly:

これは、(我我{が/に})無視できる
'It is possible that we ignore this.'

Attaching にとって to this sentence does not work semantically because the possibility is independent of the point of view.

* 我我にとって、これは(我我{が/に})無視できる
　'For us, it is possible that we ignore this.'

gas laws - Why don't heavy and light gases separate in the atmosphere?

Everyone must have heard that balloons are filled with helium, and the fact associated with it that helium gas is light and light gases always go upward.

There comes a question to mind: if the molar mass of $\ce{CO2}$ is greater than that of $\ce{O2}$ and $\ce{N2}$, then why doesn't $\ce{CO2}$ occupy the lower layer of the atmosphere, since it is heavier than $\ce{O2}$ and $\ce{N2}$, as in the case of balloons, where helium being light rise upwards.

Answer

That's because of two reasons. One is entropy, the ultimate force of chaos and disorder. Sure, gases would like to be arranged according to their density, but even above that, they would like to be mixed, because mixing creates a great deal of entropy. If you prevent the mixing, then they would behave just as you expected. Indeed, a balloon filled with $\ce{CO2}$ would drop right to the floor and remain there.

On the other hand, if you allow mixing, light gases wouldn't necessarily go upward. Just pierce that balloon with helium, and... Well, you won't actually see much, but in fact, the helium will disperse in the atmosphere and remain there. True, its contents in the upper layers would be somewhat higher, but only somewhat. It is not like a layer of pure helium floating atop all those $\ce{O2}$ and $\ce{N2}$.

The importance of entropy is by no means limited to gases. Think of all that salt in the oceans. Salt is much more dense than water; wouldn't it just drop to the ocean floor? Well, no, it rather wouldn't.

The other reason is the constant action of winds and currents mentioned by Zhe. They stir the atmosphere (or sea water, for that matter) and make it even more uniform than it might have been otherwise.

nevua prophecy - Can Isaiah 11:2 be used a basis for the belief that the king messiah will be a prophet?

If a recent thread, I asked, "Will the king messiah be a prophet?"

@b a cited a source from Rambam's Hilkhot Teshuva, 9.2 which states, "מפני שאותו המלך שיעמוד מזרע דויד בעל חכמה יהיה יתר משלמה, ונביא גדול הוא קרוב ממשה רבנו." But, I did not see Rambam directly refer to an actual pasuk that explicitly states that the king messiah would be a prophet. (However, I do realize that a lot of ideas or notions are not explicitly stated in scripture, but otherwise inferred through various exegetical techniques.)

So, I did a little research using the technique of inference by analogy.

I suppose it is the ruach elohim that causes one to prophecy [truthfully].

For example, in Num. 11:25, it is written,

And Adonai descended in a cloud, and He spoke to him, and He took of the spirit that was upon him and put [it] upon the seventy elders. And, it came to pass, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, but they did not [prophesy] again.

וירד יהוה בענן וידבר אליו ויאצל מן־הרוח אשר עליו ויתן על־שבעים איש הזקנים ויהי כנוח עליהם הרוח ויתנבאו ולא יספו

Now, in Isaiah 11:2, a pasuk that is often cited as referring to the future king messiah, it is written,

And the spirit of Adonai will rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Adonai

ונחה עליו רוח יהוה רוח חכמה ובינה רוח עצה וגבורה רוח דעת ויראת יהוה

Based on the similar phrases employed in each pasuk, is it an accurate inference from analogy (edit: binyan av) that the king messiah would indeed be able to prophesy (and thus, be a prophet) since the spirit of Adonai rests upon him, just as the seventy elders prophesied "when the spirit [of Adonai] rested upon them"?

acid base - Titration curve graph, finding exact point of the equivalence point

I plotted all my data points and made this graph in excel. Now I need to find the volume of titrant required to read the equivalence point, as well as the pH after 18.5 mL of titrant have been added. If there any... best/correct way to go about this or anything in excel I should use to point the exact points on the line I have? Or am I just taking my best guess looking at it here?

Answer

Assuming the titration involves a strong acid and a strong base, the equivalence point is where the pH equals 7. From inspection alone and the use of a ruler, you can approximate that to be at 25.88mL of NaOH.

To show the equivalence point on a the curve, just draw a line from where the pH is equal to 7 and line it up with the titration curve. I show this in the attached image.

To calculate the pH at 18.5mL, you need to know the molarity of the acid, for which you first need the identity of the acid (for stoichiometric purposes) and the acid's concentration which you can from your titration data. Then you calculate the number of excess moles of acid present after reacting with the 18.5mL of NaOH titrant. The pH is the negative logarithm of the concentration of the protons. Remember that the moles of protons is not necessarily equal to the moles of acid since acids can release more than one proton.

halacha - Are thoughts of sin punished halachically?

Inspired by this question, I got interested in the question of halakhic punishment for thoughts of sin?

In general, the Torah is not so concerned and doesn't judge how people feel or what their desires are. It is mainly concerned in how we act.

On one side

• the gmara in Kiddushin 40a explicitly says that Hashem doesn’t regard a bad thought that doesn’t lead to action as an action (artscroll comments “hence there is no punishment for the thought”)


• another gmara (end of Bava Batra 164b) says all men think of sin every single day (presumably meaning it is not punishable)

On the other side

• later in Kiddushin 40a the gmara says that thoughts of sins one has performed and now considers permitted are punished


• in Shabbat 64a we see the army returning from the war in Midian offered a korban to atone against their lustful thoughts


• R Chaim mi Volozhin writes (Nefesh HaChaim, gate 1, ch. 4) that the body is like a mishkan, the mind is the kodesh hakodashim and thinking unclean thoughts is a desecration even greater than defiling the Kodesh Hakodoshim since the Mishkan is physical and the mind is even more holy and spiritual

So how is the halakha judging thoughts of sin? Are specific halakhic works codifying this (as opposed to more philosophical discussions)?

solutions - What is the solvent and what is the solute?

This question is and I am learning about mixtures, solutions, solutes, solvents, and other terms related to these words.

I know that a solute is the substance being mixed with or dissolved into the solvent.

Substances and mixtures: are these solvents and solutes correct?

1. coffee with milk - solvent:coffee , solute:milk


2. salt water - solvent:water , solute:salt


3. air freshener - solvent:air , solute:scent


4. brass - solvent:zinc , solute:copper

Answer

In a binary homogeneous mixture, the component present in the larger amount is generally called the "solvent". The component present in the smaller amount is generally the "solute".

In your first example, however, it is more complicated as coffee is already a complex solution (but mainly water). Milk is not a homogeneous mixture. It is a fat/protein emulsion (also mainly water).

The other three are solutions: salt water is a solution of a solid dissolved in a liquid (which is the most familiar type), air freshener (one dispersed) is a solution of one gas in others (but air itself is a mixture), and brass is a solid solution.

word choice - 「覚える」と「思い出す」の違い - what's the difference of oboeru and omoidasu?

I hear both fairly often but i still can't tell the difference and when to use what.

I found this answer in yahoo answers but it seems like there is a difference in opinion (?) - not sure, didn't understand some of the answers.

I usually hear omoidashita (思い出した) when someone suddenly recalls something. And I am sure I heard oboetenaino? (覚えてないの) a few times and to me it seems like the person is saying: "you don't remember do you?".

So it seems to me that they both mean the same thing. Is this correct?

For example:

Person1: 覚えてないの?
Person2: 思い出せない

Is this valid?

So I guess my questions are:

• Do they mean the same thing?


• Are they interchangeable?

Answer

覚える remember or "keep remembering"; 思い出す recall. These two words are supposed to illustrate the difference in meaning, not politeness.

Interesting tidbit: 覚える comes from 思ふ via 思はゆ, with ゆ being an alternative to (ら)る, the　自発・受身・可能の助動詞. So 覚える would literally be "able to think" because you have remembered it. On the other hand, 思い出す would be "to come out with a thought."

Rather than one example where they are similar, let's consider two sentences that shows how they're different:

誕生日、覚えていてくれたんですか!? 嬉しい！
She is happy because he did not forget her birthday. ("kept remembering")

突如、彼は思い出した。今日は葵の誕生日だったということを。
He had forgotten it and remembered (recalled) it just now.

Now try to exchange the two expressions:

その瞬間、彼は覚えた。
Makes no sense.

What you could say is

その瞬間、体当たりを覚えた。
It learned tackle in that instant.

Here it means 身に付ける, 体得する. What comes before を覚えた is some skill or feeling (酒の味を覚える[=知る]). The point is that you learn it and then "keep remembering" it.

記憶喪失とかなんとか言われてあたしは……あたしは…　すごく心配……本当に、誕生日、思い出してくれたんですか？

Alright, this sounds a bit construed, but I hope it gets the point across. It came to back to his mind at that moment.

More examples:

あのときのことは今もよく覚えている

この本を彼に返すことを覚えておいてね

犬が芸を覚える

新しい仕事に生き甲斐を覚える

楽しかった昔のことを忽然と思い出す

約束を急に思い出す

祖父が死んだ日のことをぼんやりと思い出す

intermolecular forces - Why does bromine increase the viscosity of olive oil?

Does bromine bond to the carbon in unsaturated fatty acids and break the double bonds between oxygen and carbon? Does this increase the viscosity of olive oil? Could someone give an elaborated explanation?

This question arose from a lab experiment. Viscosity goes up because less double bondings makes the fatty acids more “packable”. But why would bromine want to break the bonds?

organic chemistry - Comparison of the rate of SN1 and SN2 reaction

It is known that $\mathrm{S_N1}$ (Substitution Nucleophilic Unimolecular) follows the order of rate of reaction:

Tertiary ($3^\circ$) > Secondary ($2^\circ$) > Primary ($1^\circ$)

For $\mathrm{S_N2}$ (Substitution Nucleophilic Bimolecular) the order of rate:

Tertiary ($3^\circ$) < Secondary ($2^\circ$) < Primary ($1^\circ$)

But what is the effective rate of reaction, if we consider that both $\mathrm{S_N1}$ and $\mathrm{S_N2}$ may occur?

Let us assume that we are using $\ce{NaOH(aq)}$ as the reagent, and using n-butyl chloride ($1^\circ$), isobutyl chloride ($2^\circ$), and tert-butyl chloride ($3^\circ$). As water is used, substitution will be favoured, and for this discussion, let us neglect any elimination reaction occurring. In this case, what would be the effective rates of reaction for these cases?

particle が - Neutral vs. Exhaustive が

The particle が has a property that implies that, of all items from some group, the sentences applies exclusively to the noun before it. For example, in a room of people from different countries, saying 「私がアメリカ人です」 would imply that you are the only American in the room.

However, it is also possible to use a more neutral が without this meaning. For example, 「雨が降る」 is neutral and isn't comparing the rain to anything.

So how do you know when the particle が carries this exclusive-definition and when it doesn't?

Answer

Warning... this answer presents things differently from the more complex and accurate model, which can be found here: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~heycock/papers/topic-draft.pdf

I can't think of how to summarize the model in that paper to fit in an answer, so instead I'm going to present a different model (mostly from my intuition, so do take it with a grain of salt) which works for a more limited number of sentences, but I think lines up result-wise with the model in that paper.

---

Taking a basic XがY clause...

The determiners of the semantics of が are:

1. whether Y is temporary or permanent,*



2. whether X is new or old information,


3. whether the clause is embedded or not

---

When you have a temporary predicate, the neutral reading of が becomes possible.

雨が降っている。
"Rain is falling."

天気が寒い。

"The weather is cold."

牛が草を食べている。
"A cow is eating grass."

_{(Note: all of these can be made exhaustive by placing stress on the が-marked argument.)}

However, if the が-marked argument is already in discourse, then you would mark it by は.

「雨はどう？」「雨はまだ降っている。」 (You could, and normally would just drop 雨は entirely, but it's okay to have it, and necessary if you say some other stuff before answering the question. Using 雨が would sound weird, as if you aren't responding to the question but just making a statement.)

「今日の天気は寒いねー。」 (Using が would be exhaustive here)

「あの牛は草を食べている。」 (Using が would be exhaustive here)

There are some things which are in discourse by construction, such as 私, or things marked by その, あの, 今日の etc. -- so if they are accompanied by が the only way to read them is as exhaustive reading despite the possibility introduced by a temporary predicate.

---

When you have a permanent predicate, it is necessarily the exhaustive reading of 「が」:

太郎が背が高い。

アメリカに生まれた人がアメリカ人だ。

牛が草を食べる。

So you instead mark these things with は to get a neutral reading.

---

What I've said so far holds true at the top level of the sentence. However, in (most) subordinate clauses, the only reading available for は is the contrasitive reading, so instead things fall back to が (regardless of temporary/permanent or old/new distinctions):

太郎は私が好きな本を捨てた。

_{[*] These are called "stage-level predicate" and "individual-level predicate" in the literature.}

halacha - Borrowing vs renting money

Is it wrong to "rent" a Jewish person some money?
Since he needs to use it, and once he is done using it he will pay you back.

Answer

Rabbi Reisman in Hilchos Ribis deals with this. If you are going to spend the money, then that is defined as a loan and any fee for that 'rental' is 'ribis'. Renting property means that you return the same property that you rented, such as renting a tractor to plow your field. That is why there is a discussion as to borrowing flour to make a cake and when, if the price changes, returning the same amount of flour is or is not ribis. Trying to use English syntax and calling the use of the money 'rent' does not change the halacha.

@Fred points to Legendary Coins and Currency as a valid use of coins that can be rented rather than loaned. In this case, the coins themselves must be returned.

I apologize to @Fred for mistyping the citation. Thank you @DoubleAA for correcting it.

number - Shelosha Ve'esrim?

Who knows twenty-three?

Please cite/link your sources, if possible. After about one business day, I will:

• 
  

  Upvote all interesting answers.

  
  



• 
  

  Accept the best answer.

  
  


• 
  

  Go on to the next number.

  
  

Answer

23 cubits (and a fraction) is the difference in elevation between the Spring of Eitam and the courtyard of the Beis Hamikdash.

The importance of this is that this spring was the source for the Kohen Gadol's mikvah, which was situated atop one of the gates (twenty cubits above the courtyard) and which was three cubits tall. In this way the water could flow into the mikvah based on gravity alone, without requiring pumps or the like, which would disqualify it. (Yoma 31a)

How do I predict the solubility of a compound in a mixture of water and an organic co-solvent?

I'm trying to predict the solubility of long alcohols (e.g. 1-octanol, 1-decanol or 1-dodecanol) in a mixture of water and an organic co-solvent such as DMSO, acetonitrile or ethyl acetate.

For example, decanol in water with 25% DMSO or saturated with ethyl acetate (8.3%). I of course know the solubility of alcohols in water, but not in organic solvents or in mixtures.

I found a server to predict the solubility of any compound in any solvent, but I'm not sure how accurate it is and it only does predictions for pure solvents, not mixtures: http://showme.physics.drexel.edu/onsc/models/multisolvent.php

Any input on this would be greatly appreciated!

filters - Compute the time derivative of a noisy digital signal?

The issue is that my signal is very noisy. I need extract its time derivative as accurate as possible. P.S. I do not have any prior knowledge on the signal (black box).

On forums some suggested Savitzky-Golay filter.

Any idea please? If so, is there any c++ library for the purpose?

In fact, for my application I need to compute optical-flow like information for control purpose. I compute an estimate using image information. Then I need to compute the time derivative of this estimate.

4th order Savitzky Golay filter introduces delay, yet I need the output in real-time (real time control). For info:

• The signal is regularly sampled;


• The noise is not defined but bounded;


• The output needs to be real-time: delay-minimal;


• The signal is black box: I only get a measure each iteration.

tanach - If kings were supposed to be from Shevet Yehuda, why was Shaul from Binyamin anointed?

If kings were supposed to be from Shevet Yehuda, why was Shaul from Binyamin anointed?

tefilla - What siddur do Open Orthodox people use?

Do followers of Avraham Weiss’s Open Orthodoxy have their own siddur or use someone else’s? I’d be curious about any ways their liturgy might differ from the mainstream.

Answer

Many of the people who daven at the Hillel Minyan at Northwestern University (where I davened in college) associate with the Open Orthodox movement. Most of them daven with the Koren Sacks siddur. Some others use the Artscroll Siddur edition that includes the prayers for Israel, TzaHa"L, the United States, etc.

Since they use mainstream siddurim, their liturgy does not really differ from the mainstream. Most of the difference between them and more mainstream Orthodox Jews is difference in interpretation in hashkafa/halacha (depending on who you ask).

computer vision - Good features / algorithms for recognizing car-models in images

I have a question concerning object recognition, especially recognizing car-models! I am at the beginning of a work about identifying the same car-model in different images. At the moment I think one of the best algorithm for 3D object recognition is SIFT but after playing around a bit with a demo implementation I have the strange feeling this algorithm has some problems with shiny metal objects like cars, especially if they have different colors.

Does anyone know some work on this area in general some suitable algorithm for the task of finding the same car-model in different images?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Answer

I would have a look at the so called "bag of words" or "visual words" approach. It is increasingly used for image categorization and identification. This algorithm usually starts by detecting robust points, such as SIFT points, in an image. The region around these found points (the 128 bit SIFT descriptor in your case) is used.

In the most simple form, one can collect all data from all descriptors from all images and cluster them, for example using k-means. Every original image then has descriptors that contribute to a number of clusters. The centroids of these clusters, i.e. the visual words, can be used as a new descriptor for the image. Basically you hope that the clusters an image its descriptors contribute to, is indicative of the image category.

Again, in the most simple case, you have a list of clusters, and per image, you count which of these clusters contained descriptors from that image and how many. This is similar to the Term Frequency/ Inverse Document Frequency (TD/IFD) method used in text retrieval. See this quick and dirty Matlab script.

This approach is actively researched and there are many much more advanced algorithms around.

The VLfeat website contains a nice more advanced demo of this approach, classifying the caltech 101 dataset. Also noteworthy, are results and software from Caltech itself.

inorganic chemistry - Why do nitrogen molecules not act as ligands in haemoglobin?

Nitrogen molecules $(\ce{N2})$ have lone pairs, which, as far as I know, is the property of oxygen molecules $(\ce{O2})$ that allows them to act as ligands bonding to iron in haemoglobin in the blood. Why then is atmospheric nitrogen unable to act as a ligand and form dative bonds to iron in the blood as oxygen is able to?