Look what flew out of Israel into Syria
- Thread starter lydever91
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
O
I will do one better for you. In the area I work in most, we use a term in our standard mathematics that the Europeans do not, RIGHT TRIANGLE.
I use these 2 formulas the most in my daily work. I will also clarify terms for you.
sin = sine
cos = cosine
tan = tangent
I will also clarify the machine I use the most in my R&D Department:
(the 3 basics are manual mill, manual lathe, surface-od/id grinder)
Here is a definition that best describes my biggest responsibility (jig grinder).
A jig grinder is a machine tool used for grinding complex shapes and holes where the highest degrees of accuracy and finish are required.
-
1
- Show all
I am a machinist by trade as well......Mazak quick turn 30, Mazak Horizontal Machining centers, Sunnen inside diameter hone, mills, lathes, surface grinders, Hurco Mills, Horizontal Boring Bridgeport Mills, lathes, Octagon turret lathes, Swift Cut Laser etc......Mostly parts for jets, missiles, space shuttle (when operational), bombers, transports etc............
-
1
- Show all
what do i do with '375' ?
why don't i do
like a right triangle?
does this mean ch. 125 v. 3 has an equivalence relation to ch.3 v. 125 ((if it exists anywhere))?
or likewise ch. 125 v. 3 is somehow congruent to ch. 25 v. 15 ?
((since 125*3 = 375 = 25*15)) ?
should this be equally congruent to ch. 15 v. 25?
and ch. 75 v. 5 ((because 75*5 = 375)) ? also ch. 5 v. 75 ((if it exists)) ?
why don't i do
like a right triangle?
does this mean ch. 125 v. 3 has an equivalence relation to ch.3 v. 125 ((if it exists anywhere))?
or likewise ch. 125 v. 3 is somehow congruent to ch. 25 v. 15 ?
((since 125*3 = 375 = 25*15)) ?
should this be equally congruent to ch. 15 v. 25?
and ch. 75 v. 5 ((because 75*5 = 375)) ? also ch. 5 v. 75 ((if it exists)) ?
thanks..
how do i know i should be assuming a planar, Euclidean geometry?
is the Bible 2d? should we be working in an infinite dimensional vector space? at least Euclidean 3d ((conic sections maybe?))
and ((as i asked in post above)) you're giving me a right triangle and some of its associated elementary geometry -- yet the example you gave, Psalm 125:3, you do the equivalent of an area calculation for a rectangle with sides {125,3} . . . ?
are we ascribing '125' to θ and 3 to 'adjacent side' ?
should we do 3*tan(125) = -2.346 ((radians)) or -4.284 ((degrees)) ?
should we use degrees or radians? should we be using complex numbers instead?
how do i know i should be assuming a planar, Euclidean geometry?
is the Bible 2d? should we be working in an infinite dimensional vector space? at least Euclidean 3d ((conic sections maybe?))
and ((as i asked in post above)) you're giving me a right triangle and some of its associated elementary geometry -- yet the example you gave, Psalm 125:3, you do the equivalent of an area calculation for a rectangle with sides {125,3} . . . ?
are we ascribing '125' to θ and 3 to 'adjacent side' ?
should we do 3*tan(125) = -2.346 ((radians)) or -4.284 ((degrees)) ?
should we use degrees or radians? should we be using complex numbers instead?
-
1
- Show all
O
That is AWESOME!!
I should not post this but will anyways hahahaha
I build gages for Boeing (turbine motors-satellite-military-spy) , Honeywell (satellite-military-spy), Northrop Grumman (satellite-military-spy), Lockheed Martin (satellite-military-spy), Hamilton Sundstrand (satellite-military-spy), Woodward (satellite-military-spy), Raytheon (satellite-military-spy), GKN Aerospace (satellite-military-spy), Allison Transmission, General Motors, Chrysler (Mercedes Benz - Fiat).
We also had our part of the "Bunker Bomb" timing mechanism and the trigger sensor for the taser gun.
Being in R&D allows me to experiment in all phases of machining and GD&T.
-
1
- Show all
O
Good question, because not every verse in Psalms results in something concrete. Basically, once you take the chapter number and times it by the verse number, you take your answer and do a random search throughout the Bible for where that number has been specifically mentioned.
What I have discovered on certain verses, is the number I randomly searched that led to matches in other Books of the Bible, points to a very specific verse from another book. When I read that specific verse and understand it's meaning, then go back to the original chapter and verse I used for the formula, both the original verse and the matched verse align up perfectly in its meaning.
In other words, the Book of Psalms that is typically known as a Worship and Praise Book (does describe Christ's suffering upon the Cross), actually has a lot of end time references to it, before we ever find such references in the prophets, Matthew, some of Paul's writings, and the Book of Revelation. This formula method enlightens how we are able to compare the similarities throughout the Bible.
That is cool......I love machining.....taking something that is nothing and machining high precision parts used in all sorts of military applications.....some of the things I have machined....
Hinge pins for guidance fin on Harpoon missiles
Canopy latches for F-16's
Struts for the wings on B1 Bombers and C4 Transports
We machined parts for the aft propulsion system for the Space Shuttle
Tube sheets out of Inconel used in Navy subs and Aircraft carriers to convert sea water to clean usable water
Machined and assembled spring systems out of beryllium copper to text thrust on jet engines for McDonnell Douglas
All sorts of parts for McDonnell Douglas, Seaman Corporation, Rockwell International, Kimberly Clark, etc....any I have no idea of application....some were not even named and we had to sign papers to keep our mouths shut......the tightest tolerance I ever had to hold was .0002 of an inch.......and for those reading that do not know how tight this is....<--2 tenths of a thousandth of an inch.....in other words divide an inch by 10000...within 2 of the 10000 HAHAH had to inside diameter hone those parts....went on a F-16...
Some of the materials I have machined, all sorts off stainless steels, aircraft aluminum, cold roll, hot roll, leaded steel, lenin phenolic, beryllium copper, numerous tool steels, pure teflon, brass, pot metal, copper, uhmw, <--a black version of this cannot remember name, lexan, titanium........so many I cannot remember all of them HAHA
Hinge pins for guidance fin on Harpoon missiles
Canopy latches for F-16's
Struts for the wings on B1 Bombers and C4 Transports
We machined parts for the aft propulsion system for the Space Shuttle
Tube sheets out of Inconel used in Navy subs and Aircraft carriers to convert sea water to clean usable water
Machined and assembled spring systems out of beryllium copper to text thrust on jet engines for McDonnell Douglas
All sorts of parts for McDonnell Douglas, Seaman Corporation, Rockwell International, Kimberly Clark, etc....any I have no idea of application....some were not even named and we had to sign papers to keep our mouths shut......the tightest tolerance I ever had to hold was .0002 of an inch.......and for those reading that do not know how tight this is....<--2 tenths of a thousandth of an inch.....in other words divide an inch by 10000...within 2 of the 10000 HAHAH had to inside diameter hone those parts....went on a F-16...
Some of the materials I have machined, all sorts off stainless steels, aircraft aluminum, cold roll, hot roll, leaded steel, lenin phenolic, beryllium copper, numerous tool steels, pure teflon, brass, pot metal, copper, uhmw, <--a black version of this cannot remember name, lexan, titanium........so many I cannot remember all of them HAHA
-
1
-
1
- Show all
O
One would think with trying to interpret scripture and it's profound difficulties without the aid of the Holy Spirit, that this basic formula of chapter multiplied by verse would include some degree of difficulty. But it is just the opposite. It should be used in the very basic formula of chapter number multiplied by verse number and nothing else. It's as easy as 3x3=9.
To understand how basic this is, look at the Book of Job where God states he stretched a line (no doubt a tape measure) to measure the foundations of the earth.
Job 38:
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath [[stretched the line]] upon it?
This is a very basic terminology used by God, and we should think of this formula of chapter number multiplied by verse number in the same manner.
-
1
- Show all
O
um, more than half my colleagues at work are German or British; another 25% are Chinese, Arabic or Hispanic, and they all know what a right triangle is, for sure.
Euclid & Pythagoras were both Greek --- which is in Europe.
Euclid & Pythagoras were both Greek --- which is in Europe.
I mentioned the Right Triangle as I did, because I meet a lot of Europeans who still have not heard of this term. The British Standard still does not use it and it's been a term in the USA for better than 50 years.
-
1
- Show all
O
Agreed, my Dad and Uncles always had mills, lathes and grinders in their barn shop. As a child, my Dad taught me how to turn simple pins on the lathe, and then use the mill as a basic drill press for pins and cotter pins to replace the ones on farm equipment controlled by the PTO.
We even did our own bushing thin wall and replacement with stainless sleeves lol
I loved it so much, I went to get my mechanical engineering degree to only end up in R&D where I am still able to machine 80% of the time hahahaha
I bet that list also includes inconel, cpm-10, exotic plastics, cast, cobalt just to name a few others (I love metallurgy)!!
We even did our own bushing thin wall and replacement with stainless sleeves lol
I loved it so much, I went to get my mechanical engineering degree to only end up in R&D where I am still able to machine 80% of the time hahahaha
I bet that list also includes inconel, cpm-10, exotic plastics, cast, cobalt just to name a few others (I love metallurgy)!!
-
1
-
1
- Show all
the Bible is already self-similar and in a sense fractal in its content and formulation. if you describe the scripture as a graph, with ever verse a node, it is a connected graph -- there exists a path between every vertex, where edges are described by theological & typological congruencies. every single verse is connected to every other verse in some way, whether it's direct or indirect ((i.e. you take a path along edges that passes through some number of other vertices)). it repeats motifs and coherently, ubiquitously, repeats certain truths. it all testifies of Christ, His person and work.
so just because you find a verse that says "the LORD is God" and you go through some kind of calculation & search that winds up connecting another verse in some way, and that verse also implies in a sense that "the LORD is God" that is in no way at all any kind of verification of your calculation process. keep multiplying random numbers by 2 and it's not really any surprise that the answer you get is always an even number. but when you understand that all even numbers are multiples of 2, that fact is useful. it's not useful to come up with a way to pick a blade of grass out a field and say 'this piece of grass is green!' -- they are all green.
mathematics requires rigor and justification. why are we multiplying chapters and verses?
and mathematics is not always about numbers. it is fundamentally not numeric but abstract, in that something like the integers or a subset of the integers is only one of an infinite number of spaces that an algebraic topology can describe. if you really want to approach the Bible with an integer-based method of interpretation, we ought to first establish a topology of equivalence relations that we can fully justify in the abstract before ever applying any kind of numerical calculation. without that, all this is completely arbitrary.
IOW
you found 375 somewhere and attached significance to it relative to Psalm 127:3
this is still completely arbitrary unless you can show somehow that relationship is unique to this verse.
this is still completely arbitrary unless you can show that the same relationship exists with Psalm 15:25 and Psalm 75:5 and is also unique to this equivalence set under the numerical congruency.
this is still completely arbitrary if you can't demonstrate that it is true for all verses in Psalms and their resultants, or prove that it must be so for whatever subset that it is, and show why it is so for either every verse in the whole book or why it is necessarily only the case for whatever subset it is actually so for.
i hope some of this makes sense.
i'm probably sounding very critical; don't take this the wrong way, please. as i said, i'm a mathematician - not just 'i do some math as part of my job' -- so i am scrutinizing this stuff with the goal of either fully establishing a legitimate algorithmic approach here or definitively discarding a meaningless pseudo-relationship.
so just because you find a verse that says "the LORD is God" and you go through some kind of calculation & search that winds up connecting another verse in some way, and that verse also implies in a sense that "the LORD is God" that is in no way at all any kind of verification of your calculation process. keep multiplying random numbers by 2 and it's not really any surprise that the answer you get is always an even number. but when you understand that all even numbers are multiples of 2, that fact is useful. it's not useful to come up with a way to pick a blade of grass out a field and say 'this piece of grass is green!' -- they are all green.
mathematics requires rigor and justification. why are we multiplying chapters and verses?
and mathematics is not always about numbers. it is fundamentally not numeric but abstract, in that something like the integers or a subset of the integers is only one of an infinite number of spaces that an algebraic topology can describe. if you really want to approach the Bible with an integer-based method of interpretation, we ought to first establish a topology of equivalence relations that we can fully justify in the abstract before ever applying any kind of numerical calculation. without that, all this is completely arbitrary.
IOW
you found 375 somewhere and attached significance to it relative to Psalm 127:3
this is still completely arbitrary unless you can show somehow that relationship is unique to this verse.
this is still completely arbitrary unless you can show that the same relationship exists with Psalm 15:25 and Psalm 75:5 and is also unique to this equivalence set under the numerical congruency.
this is still completely arbitrary if you can't demonstrate that it is true for all verses in Psalms and their resultants, or prove that it must be so for whatever subset that it is, and show why it is so for either every verse in the whole book or why it is necessarily only the case for whatever subset it is actually so for.
i hope some of this makes sense.
i'm probably sounding very critical; don't take this the wrong way, please. as i said, i'm a mathematician - not just 'i do some math as part of my job' -- so i am scrutinizing this stuff with the goal of either fully establishing a legitimate algorithmic approach here or definitively discarding a meaningless pseudo-relationship.