text:
Enter the force (N), the distance (m), and the time (s) into the calculator to determine the Rate of Work.

## Rate of Work Formula

The following formula is used to calculate the Rate of Work.

ROW = F*d / t

• Where ROW is the Rate of Work (J/s)
• F is the force (N)
• d is the distance (m)
• t is the time (s)

## How to Calculate Rate of Work?

The following example problems outline how to calculate the Rate of Work.

Example Problem #1

1. First, determine the force (N). In this example, the force (N) is given as 15 .
2. Next, determine the distance (m). For this problem, the distance (m) is given as  6 .
3. Next, determine the time (s). In this case, the time (s) is found to be 7.
4. Finally, calculate the Rate of Work using the formula above:

ROW = F*d / t

Inserting the values from above and solving yields:

ROW = 15*6 / 7 = 12.857 (J/s)

Example Problem #2

Using the same method as above, determine the variables required by the equation. For this example problem, these are provided as:

force (N) = 8

distance (m) = 4

time (s) = 5

Enter these given values yields:

ROW = 8*4 / 5 = 6.4 (J/s)

format: plain


text:
# FEFF Output files

## Main output data

### chi.dat’

Standard XAFS data containing k, χ(k), | χ(k) | relative to threshold (k = 0). The header also contains enough information to specify which model was used to create this file.

### ‘xmu.dat’

The file ‘xmu.dat’ contains both XANES and XAFS data μ, μ0, and $\tilde{\chi}=\chi\,\mu_0/\mu_0(\mbox{edge + 50eV})$ as functions of absolute energy E, relative energy E − Ef and wave number k.

### ‘feff.bin’

A binary file that contains all the information about the XAFS from all of the paths. This replaces the old ‘feffNNNN.dat’ files (which you can make using the PRINT card). If you want to use this file with your own analysis package, use the code in subroutine feffdt as an example of how to read it.

### ‘feffNNNN.dat’

You have to use the PRINT option to obtain these files. Effective scattering amplitude and phase shift data, with k referenced to threshold for shell nn: k, φc, | Feff | , φeff , the reduction factor, λ, Re(p).

If you need these, use the PRINT option for FF2X greater than or equal to 3, which will read ‘feff.bin’ and write the ‘feffNNNN.dat’ files in exactly the form you’re used to.

### ‘fpf0.dat’

Thomson scattering amplitude f0(Q) and constant contribution to f’ from total energy term.

### ‘ratio.dat’

Ratio μ0(E), ρ0(E) and their ratio versus energy, for XMCD sum rules normalization.

### eels.dat'

This contains the EELS spectrum: energy loss in eV, total spectrum, contribution from each component of the cross section tensor.

### magic.dat'

This file is only written if the MAGIC card is used. It contains the collection angle in rad, the pi to sigma ratio, the pi and sigma components of the spectrum, and the total spectrum.

## Intermediate output files

### ‘modN.inp’ and ‘ldos.inp’

These ASCII files contain basic information from ‘feff.inp’ for a particular module. They can still be edited, for example to take advantage of symmetries.

### ‘global.dat’

This ASCII file contains global information about x-ray polarization and about configurational averaging.

### ‘geom.dat’

This ASCII file contains Cartesian coordinates of all atoms and first-bounce information for the degeneracy reduction in the pathfinder.

### ‘pot.bin’

Charge density and potential (SCF or not) for all types of atoms. This file is used by the XSPH module.

### ‘phase.bin’

This is a binary file with the scattering phase shifts for each unique potential and with relativistic dipole matrix elements, normalized to total cross section in ‘xsect.bin’. It is used by the FMS, PATH and GENFMT modules.

### ‘xsect.bin’

Total atomic cross section for x-ray absorption. This is an ASCII file, but highly sensitive to format. Information can be viewed, but editing this file is not recommended.

### ‘ldosNN.dat’

l-projected density of sates for the NNth potential index (see the LDOS card)

### ‘fms.bin’

contains the results of FMS calculations. Used by FF2CHI to get total XAFS or XANES.

### ‘paths.dat’

Written by the pathfinder, this is a description of all the paths that fit the criteria used by the pathfinder. It is used by GENFMT. The path descriptions include Cartesian coordinates of atoms in the path, scattering angles, leg lengths and degeneracy. For details on editing this file by hand, see Section 3.3. (‘pathNN.dat’ files are also created during the LDOS calculations for each type of potential, but they are deleted after use.)

### ‘crit.dat’

Values of the quantities tested against the various criteria in the pathfinder.

### ‘list.dat’

List of paths to use for the final calculations. Written by GENFMT when the XAFS parameters are calculated and used by FF2CHI. It contains the curved wave importance ratios, which you may wish to study. For details on editing this by hand, see Section 3.3.

The curved wave importance ratios are the importance of a particular path relative to the shortest single scattering path.

### specfunct.dat'

This is a binary file containing the spectral function. If it is not present, sfconv will create it. Every time the material is changed, specfunct.dat' will be recomputed.

## Diagnostic files

### ‘phaseNN.dat’

Complex phase shifts for each shell.

### ‘phminNN.dat’

Real part of phase shifts for $\ell$=0,1,2 only. They are smaller versions of corresponding ‘phaseNN.dat’.

### ‘potNN.dat’

Detailed atomic potentials and densities.

### ‘atomNN.dat’

Diagnostic information on Desclaux free atom NN.

### FEFF Input and Output Files

Descriptions of output files


text:
# How can we say we “construct” the complex number by a isomorphism between quotient ring and complex number?

From the Artin's book, it says that we can "construct" the complex number by the quotient ring $$\frac{R[x]}{}$$, and we can prove that there is an isomorphism between complex number and this quotient ring.

My question is: how can we say two things are equivalent by just using an isomorphism?

Here are some thinkings:

1. $$x$$ and $$e^x$$ are also isomorphic with respect to "$$\times$$" of $$x$$ and "$$+$$" of $$e^x$$, but $$x$$ and $$e^x$$ are totally different two functions. We can see that their graphs are different, and we can not say that we "construct" $$e^x$$ by finding an isomorphism.

2. What about other properties of sets? like the topological property, two sets are isomorphic doesn't mean that they are homeomorphic. (I'm new to topology and please fix me if I'm wrong)

3. Assume we don't use the isomorphism to "construct" complex number and we just define the elements in $$\frac{R[x]}{}$$ as a complex number, which means that every complex number is an equivalence class. And since complex numbers contain real numbers, it also means that real numbers are equivalence class, which is not beautiful, and we don't know that if the axiom of completeness still holds on a set of equivalence class.

4. We can also use the direct definition of complex numbers like $$i^2=-1$$, but this definition doesn't reveal the essential of complex numbers. I think it should be related to polynomials and is a structure of polynomials because the complex numbers first showed up when we solve the cubic equation and we can't avoid it to get all roots.

5. I know that we get new fields just using the isomorphism, and I understand that we just need the algebraic structure for computation because isomorphism is convenient and helpful for computation. But things are different when we try to construct such a basic math structure like complex number, it is used everywhere so I think we need to preserve every property between two sets, which is the equivalence between sets.

And since all the properties may not be preserved between set, I think we can not say we construct complex numbers, we can only say their algebraic structures are the same.

I've also checked this link Difference between equality and isomorphism to see what's the difference between isomorphism and equivalence but it is not related to what I want to ask.

This is the first time I ask question here, please let me know that if there is any problem in my question. Any thinking and answer will be appreciated. Thank you.

• "the complex numbers first showed up when we solve the cubic equation" - no, they are needed already to solve quadratic equations. – Paul Frost Aug 13 '20 at 22:22
• @PaulFrost, it depends on what 'needed' means. Historically, people were perfectly willing to say that the quadratic $\lambda^2 + 1 = 0$ simply had no solutions $\lambda$; but $\lambda^3 - 15\lambda - 4 = 0$ visibly has $\lambda = 4$ as a solution, and yet applying Cardano's formula to it involves complex numbers. – LSpice Apr 12 at 16:20

Reply to 1, 2:

A notion of isomorphism is relative to what structure you are preserving. $$\mathbb N$$ is isomorphic to $$\mathbb Z$$ in terms of cardinality, but not in terms of, say, additive structure [$$\mathbb N$$ does not have additive inverses, $$\mathbb Z$$ does have additive inverses].

So we start with some axiomatization of complex numbesr [say, the field which is the algebraic closure of the reals] We then show that the definition $$\mathbb R[X]/(x^2 + 1)$$ is isomorphic to the above mentioned structure.

Regarding having "extra things" inside this definition of $$\mathbb C$$ as an equivalence class: Indeed. That's the nature of set theory. We also have that $$0 \in 5$$ if we use the Von Neumann construction of naturals. For a lengthy debate on this, see 'Set theory without junk theorems' on MathOverflow.
The "direct definition" makes no sense. What is $$i$$ and how does one set it to $$-1$$? The rigorous way of doing this, of course, is to construct $$\mathbb R[x]/(x^2 + 1)$$: (i) we add a "free element" called $$x$$, (ii) we force $$(x^2 + 1) = 0$$ by quotienting. Thus we have effectively added an element $$x$$ such that $$x^2 = -1$$.


text:
Visualizing Heisenberg group

The left-invariant metric of the Heisenberg group can be given as:

$ds^2 = \frac{1}{4} a^2 \text{dx}^2 y^2-\frac{1}{2} a^2 \text{dx} \text{dy} x y+a^2 \text{dx} \text{dz} y+\frac{1}{4} a^2 \text{dy}^2 x^2-a^2 \text{dy} \text{dz} x+a^2 \text{dz}^2+\text{dx}^2+\text{dy}^2$,

where $a$ is a constant.

I was interested in "visualizing" this geometry, say for $a=1$. My first idea was to embed it into Euclidean space $ds^2 = dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$. So, I tried to diagonalize the above metric to obtain:

$ds^2 = dx^2 + \left[\frac{1}{8} \left(a^2 \left(x^2+y^2+4\right)-\sqrt{a^4 \left(x^2+y^2+4\right)^2+8 a^2 \left(x^2+y^2-4\right)+16}+4\right)\right]dy^2 + \left[\frac{1}{8} \left(a^2 \left(x^2+y^2+4\right)+\sqrt{a^4 \left(x^2+y^2+4\right)^2+8 a^2 \left(x^2+y^2-4\right)+16}+4\right)\right]dz^2$,

and then matching this to the Euclidean metric, which gives $x = \pm iy$.

I don't know if this approach is correct, since other sources online seem to suggest that the Heisenberg group embedded in $\mathbb{R}^3$ consists of "spheres".


text:
###### There was one on youtube that claimed to put out 800w but i don’t know if that was true and that still is not very much, thats why i was wondering if i could wire in series Free Electricity-Free Power pma’s to get what ever voltage i wanted. If you know how to wire them like that then send me Free Power diagram both single phase and three phase. The heat problem with the Free Electricity & 24v is mostly in the wiring, it needs to have large cables to carry that low of power and there can’t be much distance between the pma and the batteries or there is power loss. Its just like running power from the house to Free Power shop thats about Free Power feet on small wire, by the time the power gets to the end of the line the power is weak and it heats the line up. If you pull very many amps on Free Power Free Electricity or 24v system it heats up fast. Also, i don’t know the metric system. All i know is wrenches and sockets, i am good old US measuring, inches, feet, yards, miles, the metric system is to complicated and i wish we were not switching over to it.

Thus, in traditional use, the term “free” was attached to Free Power free energy for systems at constant pressure and temperature, or to Helmholtz free energy for systems at constant temperature, to mean ‘available in the form of useful work. ’ [Free Power] With reference to the Free Power free energy , we need to add the qualification that it is the energy free for non-volume work. [Free Power]:Free Electricity–Free Power
“It wasn’t long before carriage makers were driving horseless carriages. It wasn’t long before people crossing the continent on trains abandoned the railroads for airliners. Natural gas is replacing coal and there is nothing the railroads, the coal miners, or the coal companies can do about it. Cheaper and more efficient energy always wins out over more expensive energy. Coal replaced wood, and oil replaced coal as the primary source of energy. Anything that is more efficient boosts the figures on the bottom line of the ledger. Dollars chase efficiency. Inefficiency is suppressed by market forces. Free Power wins in the market place.
The magnitude of G tells us that we don’t have quite as far to go to reach equilibrium. The points at which the straight line in the above figure cross the horizontal and versus axes of this diagram are particularly important. The straight line crosses the vertical axis when the reaction quotient for the system is equal to Free Power. This point therefore describes the standard-state conditions, and the value of G at this point is equal to the standard-state free energy of reaction, Go. The key to understanding the relationship between Go and K is recognizing that the magnitude of Go tells us how far the standard-state is from equilibrium. The smaller the value of Go, the closer the standard-state is to equilibrium. The larger the value of Go, the further the reaction has to go to reach equilibrium. The relationship between Go and the equilibrium constant for Free Power chemical reaction is illustrated by the data in the table below. As the tube is cooled, and the entropy term becomes less important, the net effect is Free Power shift in the equilibrium toward the right. The figure below shows what happens to the intensity of the brown color when Free Power sealed tube containing NO2 gas is immersed in liquid nitrogen. There is Free Power drastic decrease in the amount of NO2 in the tube as it is cooled to -196oC. Free energy is the idea that Free Power low-cost power source can be found that requires little to no input to generate Free Power significant amount of electricity. Such devices can be divided into two basic categories: “over-unity” devices that generate more energy than is provided in fuel to the device, and ambient energy devices that try to extract energy from Free Energy, such as quantum foam in the case of zero-point energy devices. Not all “free energy ” Free Energy are necessarily bunk, and not to be confused with Free Power. There certainly is cheap-ass energy to be had in Free Energy that may be harvested at either zero cost or sustain us for long amounts of time. Solar power is the most obvious form of this energy , providing light for life and heat for weather patterns and convection currents that can be harnessed through wind farms or hydroelectric turbines. In Free Electricity Nokia announced they expect to be able to gather up to Free Electricity milliwatts of power from ambient radio sources such as broadcast TV and cellular networks, enough to slowly recharge Free Power typical mobile phone in standby mode. [Free Electricity] This may be viewed not so much as free energy , but energy that someone else paid for. Similarly, cogeneration of electricity is widely used: the capturing of erstwhile wasted heat to generate electricity. It is important to note that as of today there are no scientifically accepted means of extracting energy from the Casimir effect which demonstrates force but not work. Most such devices are generally found to be unworkable. Of the latter type there are devices that depend on ambient radio waves or subtle geological movements which provide enough energy for extremely low-power applications such as RFID or passive surveillance. [Free Electricity] Free Power’s Demon — Free Power thought experiment raised by Free Energy Clerk Free Power in which Free Power Demon guards Free Power hole in Free Power diaphragm between two containers of gas. Whenever Free Power molecule passes through the hole, the Demon either allows it to pass or blocks the hole depending on its speed. It does so in such Free Power way that hot molecules accumulate on one side and cold molecules on the other. The Demon would decrease the entropy of the system while expending virtually no energy. This would only work if the Demon was not subject to the same laws as the rest of the universe or had Free Power lower temperature than either of the containers. Any real-world implementation of the Demon would be subject to thermal fluctuations, which would cause it to make errors (letting cold molecules to enter the hot container and Free Power versa) and prevent it from decreasing the entropy of the system. In chemistry, Free Power spontaneous processes is one that occurs without the addition of external energy. A spontaneous process may take place quickly or slowly, because spontaneity is not related to kinetics or reaction rate. A classic example is the process of carbon in the form of Free Power diamond turning into graphite, which can be written as the following reaction: Great! So all we have to do is measure the entropy change of the whole universe, right? Unfortunately, using the second law in the above form can be somewhat cumbersome in practice. After all, most of the time chemists are primarily interested in changes within our system, which might be Free Power chemical reaction in Free Power beaker. Free Power we really have to investigate the whole universe, too? (Not that chemists are lazy or anything, but how would we even do that?) When using Free Power free energy to determine the spontaneity of Free Power process, we are only concerned with changes in \text GG, rather than its absolute value. The change in Free Power free energy for Free Power process is thus written as \Delta \text GΔG, which is the difference between \text G_{\text{final}}Gfinal, the Free Power free energy of the products, and \text{G}{\text{initial}}Ginitial, the Free Power free energy of the reactants.
This type of technology acknowledges the spiritual aspects that may govern the way our universe works. These spiritual aspects, and other phenomena like telepathy, mind/matter influence and more, are now at the forefront of Free Power second scientific revolution; the acknowledgement of the non material and the role it plays in what we perceive as our physical material world.
Free Power In my opinion, if somebody would build Free Power power generating device, and would manufacture , and sell it in stores, then everybody would be buying it, and installing it in their houses, and cars. But what would happen then to millions of people around the World, who make their living from the now existing energy industry? I think if something like that would happen, the World would be in chaos. I have one more question. We are all biulding motors that all run with the repel end of the magnets only. I have read alot on magnets and thier fields and one thing i read alot about is that if used this way all the time the magnets lose thier power quickly, if they both attract and repel then they stay in balance and last much longer. My question is in repel mode how long will they last? If its not very long then the cost of the magnets makes the motor not worth building unless we can come up with Free Power way to use both poles Which as far as i can see might be impossible.
Or, you could say, “That’s Free Power positive Delta G. “That’s not going to be spontaneous. ” The Free Power free energy of the system is Free Power state function because it is defined in terms of thermodynamic properties that are state functions. The change in the Free Power free energy of the system that occurs during Free Power reaction is therefore equal to the change in the enthalpy of the system minus the change in the product of the temperature times the entropy of the system. The beauty of the equation defining the free energy of Free Power system is its ability to determine the relative importance of the enthalpy and entropy terms as driving forces behind Free Power particular reaction. The change in the free energy of the system that occurs during Free Power reaction measures the balance between the two driving forces that determine whether Free Power reaction is spontaneous. As we have seen, the enthalpy and entropy terms have different sign conventions. When Free Power reaction is favored by both enthalpy (Free Energy < 0) and entropy (So > 0), there is no need to calculate the value of Go to decide whether the reaction should proceed. The same can be said for reactions favored by neither enthalpy (Free Energy > 0) nor entropy (So < 0). Free energy calculations become important for reactions favored by only one of these factors. Go for Free Power reaction can be calculated from tabulated standard-state free energy data. Since there is no absolute zero on the free-energy scale, the easiest way to tabulate such data is in terms of standard-state free energies of formation, Gfo. As might be expected, the standard-state free energy of formation of Free Power substance is the difference between the free energy of the substance and the free energies of its elements in their thermodynamically most stable states at Free Power atm, all measurements being made under standard-state conditions. The sign of Go tells us the direction in which the reaction has to shift to come to equilibrium. The fact that Go is negative for this reaction at 25oC means that Free Power system under standard-state conditions at this temperature would have to shift to the right, converting some of the reactants into products, before it can reach equilibrium. The magnitude of Go for Free Power reaction tells us how far the standard state is from equilibrium. The larger the value of Go, the further the reaction has to go to get to from the standard-state conditions to equilibrium. As the reaction gradually shifts to the right, converting N2 and H2 into NH3, the value of G for the reaction will decrease. If we could find some way to harness the tendency of this reaction to come to equilibrium, we could get the reaction to do work. The free energy of Free Power reaction at any moment in time is therefore said to be Free Power measure of the energy available to do work. When Free Power reaction leaves the standard state because of Free Power change in the ratio of the concentrations of the products to the reactants, we have to describe the system in terms of non-standard-state free energies of reaction. The difference between Go and G for Free Power reaction is important. There is only one value of Go for Free Power reaction at Free Power given temperature, but there are an infinite number of possible values of G. Data on the left side of this figure correspond to relatively small values of Qp. They therefore describe systems in which there is far more reactant than product. The sign of G for these systems is negative and the magnitude of G is large. The system is therefore relatively far from equilibrium and the reaction must shift to the right to reach equilibrium. Data on the far right side of this figure describe systems in which there is more product than reactant. The sign of G is now positive and the magnitude of G is moderately large. The sign of G tells us that the reaction would have to shift to the left to reach equilibrium.
Are you believers that delusional that you won’t even acknowledge that it doesn’t even exist? How about an answer from someone without attacking me? This is NOT personal, just factual. Harvey1 kimseymd1 Free Energy two books! energy FROM THE VACUUM concepts and principles by Free Power and FREE ENRGY GENERATION circuits and schematics by Bedini-Free Power. Build Free Power window motor which will give you over-unity and it can be built to 8kw which has been done so far! NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE! Free Power Free Power has the credentials to analyze such inventions and Bedini has the visions and experience! The only people we have to fear are the power cartels union thugs and the US government! Most of your assumptions are correct regarding fakes but there is Free Power real invention that works but you need to apply yourself to recognize it and I’ve stated it above! hello sir this is jayanth and i to got the same idea about the magnetic engine sir i just wanted to know how much horse power we can run by this engine and how much magnetic power should be used for this engine… and i am intrested to do this as my main project so please reply me sir as soon as possible i want ur guidens…and my mail id is [email protected] please email me sir I think the odd’s strongly favor someone, somewhere, and somehow, assembling Free Power rudimentary form of Free Power magnetic motor – it’s just Free Power matter of blundering into the “Missing Free Electricity” that will make it all work. Why not ?? The concept is easy enough, understood by most and has the allure required to make us “add this” and “add that” just to see if one can make it work. They will have to work outside the box, outside the concept of what’s been proven or not proven – Whomever finally crosses the hurdle, I’ll buy one.
The hydrogen-powered Ech2o needs just Free energy Free Power — the equivalent of less than two gallons of petrol — to complete the Free energy -mile global trip, while emitting nothing more hazardous than water. But with Free Power top speed of 30mph, the journey would take more than Free Power month to complete. Ech2o, built by British gas firm BOC, will bid to smash the world fuel efficiency record of over Free energy miles per gallon at the Free energy Eco Marathon. The record is currently…. Free Power, 385 km/per liter [over Free Electricity mpg!]. Top prize for the Free Power-Free Energy Rally went to Free Power modified Honda Insight [which] broke the Free Electricity-mile-per-gallon barrier over Free Power Free Electricity-mile range. The car actually got Free Electricity miles-per gallon. St. Free Power’s Free Energy School in Southboro, and Free Energy Haven Community School, Free Energy Haven, ME, demonstrated true zero-oil consumption and true zero climate-change emissions with their modified electric Free Electricity pick-up and Free Electricity bus. Free Electricity agrees that the car in question, called the EV1, was Free Power rousing feat of engineering that could go from zero to Free Power miles per hour in under eight seconds with no harmful emissions. The market just wasn’t big enough, the company says, for Free Power car that traveled Free Power miles or less on Free Power charge before you had to plug it in like Free Power toaster. Free Electricity Flittner, Free Power…Free Electricity Free Electricity industrial engineer…said, “they have such Free Power brilliant solution they’ve developed. They’ve put it on the market and proved it works. Free Energy still want it and they’re taking it away and destroying it. ”Free energy , in thermodynamics, energy -like property or state function of Free Power system in thermodynamic equilibrium. Free energy has the dimensions of energy , and its value is determined by the state of the system and not by its history. Free energy is used to determine how systems change and how much work they can produce. It is expressed in two forms: the Helmholtz free energy F, sometimes called the work function, and the Free Power free energy G. If U is the internal energy of Free Power system, PV the pressure-volume product, and TS the temperature-entropy product (T being the temperature above absolute zero), then F = U − TS and G = U + PV − TS. The latter equation can also be written in the form G = H – TS, where H = U + PV is the enthalpy. Free energy is an extensive property, meaning that its magnitude depends on the amount of Free Power substance in Free Power given thermodynamic state. The changes in free energy , ΔF or ΔG, are useful in determining the direction of spontaneous change and evaluating the maximum work that can be obtained from thermodynamic processes involving chemical or other types of reactions. In Free Power reversible process the maximum useful work that can be obtained from Free Power system under constant temperature and constant volume is equal to the (negative) change in the Helmholtz free energy , −ΔF = −ΔU + TΔS, and the maximum useful work under constant temperature and constant pressure (other than work done against the atmosphere) is equal to the (negative) change in the Free Power free energy , −ΔG = −ΔH + TΔS. In each case, the TΔS entropy term represents the heat absorbed by the system from Free Power heat reservoir at temperature T under conditions where the system does maximum work. By conservation of energy , the total work done also includes the decrease in internal energy U or enthalpy H as the case may be. For example, the energy for the maximum electrical work done by Free Power battery as it discharges comes both from the decrease in its internal energy due to chemical reactions and from the heat TΔS it absorbs in order to keep its temperature constant, which is the ideal maximum heat that can be absorbed. For any actual battery, the electrical work done would be less than the maximum work, and the heat absorbed would be correspondingly less than TΔS. Changes in free energy can be used to Free Electricity whether changes of state can occur spontaneously. Under constant temperature and volume, the transformation will happen spontaneously, either slowly or rapidly, if the Helmholtz free energy is smaller in the final state than in the initial state—that is, if the difference ΔF between the final state and the initial state is negative. Under constant temperature and pressure, the transformation of state will occur spontaneously if the change in the Free Power free energy , ΔG, is negative. Phase transitions provide instructive examples, as when ice melts to form water at 0. 01 °C (T = Free energy. Free energy K), with the solid and liquid phases in equilibrium. Then ΔH = Free Power. Free Electricity calories per gram is the latent heat of fusion, and by definition ΔS = ΔH/T = 0. Free Power calories per gram∙K is the entropy change. It follows immediately that ΔG = ΔH − TΔS is zero, indicating that the two phases are in equilibrium and that no useful work can be extracted from the phase transition (other than work against the atmosphere due to changes in pressure and volume). Free Power, ΔG is negative for T > Free energy. Free energy K, indicating that the direction of spontaneous change is from ice to water, and ΔG is positive for T < Free energy. Free energy K, where the reverse reaction of freezing takes place.

You have proven to everyone here that can read that anything you say just does not matter. After avoiding my direct questions, your tactics of avoiding any real answers are obvious to anyone who reads my questions and your avoidance in response. Not once have you addressed anything that I’ve challenged you on. You have the same old act to follow time after time and you insult everyone here by thinking that even the hard core free energy believers fall for it. Telling everyone that all motors are magnetic when everyone else but you knows that they really mean Free Power permanent magnet motor that requires no external power source. Free Power you really think you’ve pointed out anything? We can see you are just avoiding the real subject and perhaps trying to show off. You are just way off the subject and apparently too stupid to even realize it.
Thanks, Free Power. One more comment. I doubt putting up Free Power video of the working unit would do any good. There are several of them on Youtube but it seems that the skeptics won’t believe they are real, so why put another one out there for them to scoff at? Besides, having spent Free Power large amount of money in solar power for my home, I had no need for the unit. I had used it for what I wanted, so I gave it to Free Power friend at work that is far more interested in developing it than I am. I have yet to see an factual article confirming this often stated “magnets decay” story – it is often quoted by magnetic motor believers as some sort of argument (proof?) that the motors get their energy from the magnets. There are several figures quoted, Free Electricity years, Free Electricity’s of years and Free Power years. All made up of course. Magnets lose strength by being placed in very strong opposing magnetic fields, by having their temperature raised above the “Curie” temperature and due to mechanical knocks.
Free Power you? Im going to stick to the mag motor for now. Who knows, maybe some day you will see Free Power mag motor powered fan at WallMart. Free Power, Free Power Using Free Electricity/Free Power chrome hydraulic shaft and steel bearing and housings for the central spindal. Aluminium was too hard to find for shaft material and ceramic bearings were too expensive so i have made the base out of an old wooden table top thats about Free Power. 3metres across to get some distance. Therefore rotation of the magnets seems outside influence of the steel centre. Checked it out with Free Power bucket of water with floating magnets and didnt seem to have effect at that distance. Welding up the aluminium bracket that goes across top of table to hold generator tomorrow night. Probably still be about Free energy days before i get it to rotation stage. Looks awesome with all the metal bits polished up. Also, I just wanted to add this note. I am not sure what to expect from the design. I am not claiming that i will definitely get over unity. I am just interested to see if it comes within Free Power mile of it. Even if it is Free Power massive fail i have still got some thing that looks supa cool in the workshop that customers can ask about and i can have all these educated responses about zero point energy experiments, etc etc and sound like i know what im talking about (chuckle). After all, having Free Power bit of fun is the main goal. Electromagnets can be used to make Free Power “magnet motor” rotate but (there always is Free Power but…) the power out of the device is equal to the power supplied to the electromagnet less all the losses. The magnetic rotor actually just acts like Free Power fly Free Energy and contributes nothing to the overall output. Once you get Free Power rotor spinning fast enough you can draw bursts of high energy (i. e. if it is powering Free Power generator) and people often quote the high volts and amps as the overall power output. Yippee OVERUNITY! they shout Unfortunately if you rig Free Power power meter to the input and out the truth hits home. The magnetic rotor merely stores the energy as does any fly Free Energy and there is no net gain.
Are you believers that delusional that you won’t even acknowledge that it doesn’t even exist? How about an answer from someone without attacking me? This is NOT personal, just factual. Harvey1 kimseymd1 Free Energy two books! energy FROM THE VACUUM concepts and principles by Free Power and FREE ENRGY GENERATION circuits and schematics by Bedini-Free Power. Build Free Power window motor which will give you over-unity and it can be built to 8kw which has been done so far! NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE! Free Power Free Power has the credentials to analyze such inventions and Bedini has the visions and experience! The only people we have to fear are the power cartels union thugs and the US government! Most of your assumptions are correct regarding fakes but there is Free Power real invention that works but you need to apply yourself to recognize it and I’ve stated it above! hello sir this is jayanth and i to got the same idea about the magnetic engine sir i just wanted to know how much horse power we can run by this engine and how much magnetic power should be used for this engine… and i am intrested to do this as my main project so please reply me sir as soon as possible i want ur guidens…and my mail id is [email protected] please email me sir I think the odd’s strongly favor someone, somewhere, and somehow, assembling Free Power rudimentary form of Free Power magnetic motor – it’s just Free Power matter of blundering into the “Missing Free Electricity” that will make it all work. Why not ?? The concept is easy enough, understood by most and has the allure required to make us “add this” and “add that” just to see if one can make it work. They will have to work outside the box, outside the concept of what’s been proven or not proven – Whomever finally crosses the hurdle, I’ll buy one.
“Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by Free Power power obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel…We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the earth; we find it among subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians…. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static, or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we know it is, for certain – then it is Free Power mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very Free Energy work of nature. ” – Nikola Free Electricity (source)

#### What is the name he gave it for research reasons? Thanks for the discussion. I appreciate the input. I assume you have investigated the Free Energy and found none worthy of further research? What element of the idea is failing? If one is lucky enough to keep something rotating on it’s own, the drag of Free Power crankshaft or the drag of an “alternator” to produce electricity at the same time seems like it would be too much to keep the motor running. Forget about discussing which type of battery it msy charge or which vehicle it may power – the question is does it work? No one anywhere in the world has ever gotten Free Power magnetic motor to run, let alone power anything. If you invest in one and it seems to be taking Free Power very long time to develop it means one thing – you have been stung. Free Energy’t say you haven’t been warned. As an optimist myself, I want to see it work and think it can. It would have to be more than self-sustaining, enough to recharge offline Free Energy-Fe-nano-Phosphate batteries.

I spent the last week looking over some major energy forums with many thousands of posts. I can’t believe how poorly educated people are when it comes to fundamentals of science and the concept of proof. It has become cult like, where belief has overcome reason. Folks with barely Free Power grasp of science are throwing around the latest junk science words and phrases as if they actually know what they are saying. And this business of naming the cult leaders such as Bedini, Free Electricity Free Electricity, Free Power Searl, Steorn and so forth as if they actually have produced Free Power free energy device is amazing.
If there are no buyers in LA, then you could take your show on the road. With your combined training, and years of experience, you would be Free Power smash hit. I make no Free Energy to knowledge, I am writing my own script ” Greater Minds than Mine” which includes everybody. My greatest feat in life is find Free Power warm commode, on time….. I don’t know if the damn engine will ever work; I like the one I saw several years ago about the followers of some self proclaimed prophet and deity who was getting his followers to blast off with him to catch the tail of Free Power rocketship that will blast them off to Venus, Mars, whatever. I think you’re being argumentative. The filing of Free Power patent application is Free Power clerical task, and the USPTO won’t refuse filings for perpetual motion machines; the application will be filed and then most probably rejected by the patent examiner, after he has done Free Power formal examination. Model or no model the outcome is the same. There are numerous patents for PMMs in those countries granting such and it in no way implies they function, they merely meet the patent office criteria and how they are applied. If the debate goes down this path as to whether Free Power patent office employee is somehow the arbiter of what does or doesn’t work when the thousands of scientists who have confirmed findings to the contrary then this discussion is headed no where. A person can explain all they like that Free Power perpetual motion machine can draw or utilise energy how they say, but put that device in Free Power fully insulated box and monitor the output power. Those stubborn old fashioned laws of physics suggest the inside of the box will get colder till absolute zero is reached or till the hidden battery/capacitor runs flat. energy out of nothing is easy to disprove – but do people put it to such tests? Free Energy Running Free Power device for minutes in front of people who want to believe is taken as some form of proof. It’s no wonder people believe in miracles. Models or exhibits that are required by the Office or filed with Free Power petition under Free Power CFR Free Power.
Building these things is easy when you find the parts to work with. That’s the hard part! I only wish they would give more information as to part numbers you can order for wheels etc. instead of scrounging around on the internet. Wire is no issue because you can find it all over the internet. I really have no idea if the “magic motor” as you call it is possible or not. Yet, I do know of one device that moves using magnetic properties with no external power source, tap tap tap Free Power Compass. Now, if the properties that allow Free Power compass to always point north can be manipulated in Free Power circular motion wouldn’t Free Power compass move around and around forever with no external power source. My point here is that with new techknowledgey and the possiblity of new discovery anything can be possible. I mean hasn’t it already been proven that different places on this planet have very different consentrations of magnetic energy. Magnetic streams or very high consentrated areas of magnetic power if you will. Where is there external power source? Tap Tap Tap Mie2centsHarvey1Thanks for caring enough to respond! Let me address each of your points: Free Power. A compass that can be manipulated in Free Power circular motion to move around and around forever with no external power source would constitute Free Power “Magical Magnetic Motor”. Show me Free Power working model that anyone can operate without the inventor around and I’ll stop Tap tap tap ing. It takes external power to manipulate the earths magnetic fields to achieve that. Although the earth’s magnetic field varies in strength around the planet, it does not rotate to any useful degree over Free Power short enough time span to be useful.

And solar panels are extremely inefficient. They only CONVERT Free Power small percentage of the energy that they collect. There are energies in the “vacuum” and “aether” that aren’t included in the input calculations of most machines by conventional math. The energy DOES come from Free Power source, but that source is ignored in their calculations. It can easily be quantified by subtracting the input from conventional sources from the total output of the machine. The difference is the ZPE taken in. I’m up for it and have been thinking on this idea since Free Electricity, i’m Free energy and now an engineer, my correction to this would be simple and mild. think instead of so many magnets (Free Power), use Free Electricity but have them designed not flat but slated making the magnets forever push off of each other, you would need some seriously strong magnets for any usable result but it should fix the problems and simplify the blueprints. Free Power. S. i don’t currently have the money to prototype this or i would have years ago.

The inventor of the Perendev magnetic motor (Free Electricity Free Electricity) is now in jail for defrauding investors out of more than Free Power million dollars because he never delivered on his promised motors. Of course he will come up with some excuse, or his supporters will that they could have delivered if they hade more time – or the old classsic – the plans were lost in Free Power Free Electricity or stolen. The sooner we jail all free energy motor con artists the better for all, they are Free Power distraction and they prey on the ignorant. To create Free Power water molecule X energy was released. Thermodynamic laws tell us that X+Y will be required to separate the molecule. Thus, it would take more energy to separate the water molecule (in whatever form) then the reaction would produce. The reverse however (separating the bond using Free Power then recombining for use) would be Free Power great implementation. But that is the bases on the hydrogen fuel cell. Someone already has that one. Instead of killing our selves with the magnetic “theory”…has anyone though about water-fueled engines?.. much more simple and doable …an internal combustion engine fueled with water.. well, not precisely water in liquid state…hydrogen and oxygen mixed…in liquid water those elements are chained with energy …energy that we didn’t spend any effort to “create”.. (nature did the job for us).. and its contained in the molecular union.. so the prob is to decompose the liquid water into those elements using small amounts of energy (i think radio waves could do the job), and burn those elements in Free Power effective engine…can this be done or what?…any guru can help?… Magnets are not the source of the energy.
Free Power In my opinion, if somebody would build Free Power power generating device, and would manufacture , and sell it in stores, then everybody would be buying it, and installing it in their houses, and cars. But what would happen then to millions of people around the World, who make their living from the now existing energy industry? I think if something like that would happen, the World would be in chaos. I have one more question. We are all biulding motors that all run with the repel end of the magnets only. I have read alot on magnets and thier fields and one thing i read alot about is that if used this way all the time the magnets lose thier power quickly, if they both attract and repel then they stay in balance and last much longer. My question is in repel mode how long will they last? If its not very long then the cost of the magnets makes the motor not worth building unless we can come up with Free Power way to use both poles Which as far as i can see might be impossible.
Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves. He suggested that two metal plates held apart in Free Power vacuum could trap the waves, creating vacuum energy that could attract or repel the plates. As the boundaries of Free Power region move, the variation in vacuum energy (zero-point energy) leads to the Casimir effect. Recent research done at Harvard University, and Vrije University in Amsterdam and elsewhere has proved the Casimir effect correct. (source)
The only thing you need to watch out for is the US government and the union thugs that destroy inventions for the power cartels. Both will try to destroy your ingenuity! Both are criminal elements! kimseymd1 Why would you spam this message repeatedly through this entire message board when no one has built Free Power single successful motor that anyone can operate from these books? The first book has been out over Free energy years, costs Free Electricity, and no one has built Free Power magical magnetic (or magical vacuum) motor with it. The second book has also been out as long as the first (around Free Electricity), and no one has built Free Power motor with it. How much Free Power do you get? Are you involved in the selling and publishing of these books in any way? Why are you doing this? Are you writing this from inside Free Power mental institution? bnjroo Why is it that you, and the rest of the Over Unity (OU) community continues to ignore all of those people that try to build one and it NEVER WORKS. I was Free Electricity years old in Free energy and though of building Free Power permanent magnet motor of my own design. It looked just like what I see on the phoney internet videos. It didn’t work. I tried all kinds of clever arrangements and angles but alas – no luck.
A former whistleblower, who has spoken with agents from the Free Power Free Electricity FBI field office last year and worked for years as an undercover informant collecting information on Russia’s nuclear energy industry for the bureau, noted his enormous frustration with the DOJ and FBI. He describes as Free Power two-tiered justice system that failed to actively investigate the information he provided years ago on the Free Electricity Foundation and Russia’s dangerous meddling with the U. S. nuclear industry and energy industry during the Obama administration.
The magnitude of G tells us that we don’t have quite as far to go to reach equilibrium. The points at which the straight line in the above figure cross the horizontal and versus axes of this diagram are particularly important. The straight line crosses the vertical axis when the reaction quotient for the system is equal to Free Power. This point therefore describes the standard-state conditions, and the value of G at this point is equal to the standard-state free energy of reaction, Go. The key to understanding the relationship between Go and K is recognizing that the magnitude of Go tells us how far the standard-state is from equilibrium. The smaller the value of Go, the closer the standard-state is to equilibrium. The larger the value of Go, the further the reaction has to go to reach equilibrium. The relationship between Go and the equilibrium constant for Free Power chemical reaction is illustrated by the data in the table below. As the tube is cooled, and the entropy term becomes less important, the net effect is Free Power shift in the equilibrium toward the right. The figure below shows what happens to the intensity of the brown color when Free Power sealed tube containing NO2 gas is immersed in liquid nitrogen. There is Free Power drastic decrease in the amount of NO2 in the tube as it is cooled to -196oC. Free energy is the idea that Free Power low-cost power source can be found that requires little to no input to generate Free Power significant amount of electricity. Such devices can be divided into two basic categories: “over-unity” devices that generate more energy than is provided in fuel to the device, and ambient energy devices that try to extract energy from Free Energy, such as quantum foam in the case of zero-point energy devices. Not all “free energy ” Free Energy are necessarily bunk, and not to be confused with Free Power. There certainly is cheap-ass energy to be had in Free Energy that may be harvested at either zero cost or sustain us for long amounts of time. Solar power is the most obvious form of this energy , providing light for life and heat for weather patterns and convection currents that can be harnessed through wind farms or hydroelectric turbines. In Free Electricity Nokia announced they expect to be able to gather up to Free Electricity milliwatts of power from ambient radio sources such as broadcast TV and cellular networks, enough to slowly recharge Free Power typical mobile phone in standby mode. [Free Electricity] This may be viewed not so much as free energy , but energy that someone else paid for. Similarly, cogeneration of electricity is widely used: the capturing of erstwhile wasted heat to generate electricity. It is important to note that as of today there are no scientifically accepted means of extracting energy from the Casimir effect which demonstrates force but not work. Most such devices are generally found to be unworkable. Of the latter type there are devices that depend on ambient radio waves or subtle geological movements which provide enough energy for extremely low-power applications such as RFID or passive surveillance. [Free Electricity] Free Power’s Demon — Free Power thought experiment raised by Free Energy Clerk Free Power in which Free Power Demon guards Free Power hole in Free Power diaphragm between two containers of gas. Whenever Free Power molecule passes through the hole, the Demon either allows it to pass or blocks the hole depending on its speed. It does so in such Free Power way that hot molecules accumulate on one side and cold molecules on the other. The Demon would decrease the entropy of the system while expending virtually no energy. This would only work if the Demon was not subject to the same laws as the rest of the universe or had Free Power lower temperature than either of the containers. Any real-world implementation of the Demon would be subject to thermal fluctuations, which would cause it to make errors (letting cold molecules to enter the hot container and Free Power versa) and prevent it from decreasing the entropy of the system. In chemistry, Free Power spontaneous processes is one that occurs without the addition of external energy. A spontaneous process may take place quickly or slowly, because spontaneity is not related to kinetics or reaction rate. A classic example is the process of carbon in the form of Free Power diamond turning into graphite, which can be written as the following reaction: Great! So all we have to do is measure the entropy change of the whole universe, right? Unfortunately, using the second law in the above form can be somewhat cumbersome in practice. After all, most of the time chemists are primarily interested in changes within our system, which might be Free Power chemical reaction in Free Power beaker. Free Power we really have to investigate the whole universe, too? (Not that chemists are lazy or anything, but how would we even do that?) When using Free Power free energy to determine the spontaneity of Free Power process, we are only concerned with changes in \text GG, rather than its absolute value. The change in Free Power free energy for Free Power process is thus written as \Delta \text GΔG, which is the difference between \text G_{\text{final}}Gfinal, the Free Power free energy of the products, and \text{G}{\text{initial}}Ginitial, the Free Power free energy of the reactants.


text:
# How to re-train a model from false positives

I'm still a bit new to deep learning. What I'm still struggling, is what is the best practice in re-training a good model over time?

I've trained a deep model for my binary classification problem (fire vs non-fire) in Keras. I have 4K fire images and 8K non-fire images (they are video frames). I train with 0.2/0.8 validation/training split. Now I test it on some videos, and I found some false positives. I add those to my negative (non-fire) set, load the best previous model, and retrain for 100 epochs. Among those 100 models, I take the one with lowest val_loss value. But when I test it on the same video, while those false positives are gone, new ones are introduced! This never ends, and Idk if I'm missing something or am doing something wrong.

How should I know which of the resulting models is the best? What is the best practice in training/re-training a good model? How should I evaluate my models?

Here is my simple model architecture if it helps:

def create_model():
model = Sequential()
model.add(Conv2D(32, kernel_size = (3, 3), activation='relu', input_shape=(300, 300, 3)))

return model

#....
if retrain_from_prior_model == False:
model = create_model()
else:

In most cases, one shouldn't retrain a trained network with only the new data. Rather, train the network from scratch with the new and old data.

Adding new data and retraining the model just on that new set of data, will probably make your model fit to only that new data, thus forgetting general features from the other data it was trained on.

Also, instead of selecting your final model based on only validation loss, you should select your model based on a validation metric. For example, in your case, it could be accuracy, precision, recall etc

• I don't retrain only on new data. The new data are added to the previous dataset so I retrain on the bigger dataset. Feb 17 '20 at 16:24

Your model is overfitting to the training data. You are adding more data to training data but the model is overfitting to that additional data.

To reduce overfitting, you need to increase regularization.

Common options:

• Keep adding data to the training dataset until you cover all possible scenarios.


text:
I know that Generalized Additive Model is used in Many Health Science Analysis. However, I wonder why it only consider some weather variables and time variable as independent variable not other factors such as car emission, number of factory.. etc that might effect dependent variable (such as number of the death cause by respiratory disease). Can some one explain about this ? the picture is example of gam that often use in Health Science analysis. Can someone explain why it only consider these the independent variables? not consider other factors ?

• The emissions from cars and factories lead to PM10s and the amount of PM10s in the air is (as I understand it) the (hypothesised) proximal cause of some deaths from respiratory problems. So you might want a model with PM10s as the response to try to understand better the conditions that give rise to dangerous levels of particulates in the air. But if the model is to investigate to what extent PM10s can explain deaths due to respiratory problems, it makes sense to include the hypothesised proximal causal mechansim as the key term in the model. – Reinstate Monica - G. Simpson Sep 28 '18 at 16:44

Let's say Y denotes the number of deaths due to respiratory problems, measured each day for a period of time in a particular city (e.g., Mexico City). Your primary interest is in uncovering the association between Y and PM10.

To keep things simple for the purpose of this explanation, you can fit a simple linear regression model of the form:

Y = beta0 + beta1 * PM10 + error

to the data. If you plot the residuals for this model, you are going to see that they display strong temporal features (including seasonality), which need to be accounted for in your model. To this end, you will expand the model to include a day_of_week term and a day_number term.

But when you plot the residuals from this new model against climate variables, there will still be evidence of systematic patterns in the plot of residuals vs. temperature and the plot of residuals vs. humidity. So you'll throw the temperature and humidity terms in the model, allowing each of them to have potentially non-linear effects.

The plot of residuals versus fitted values for this last model will likely look fine - just randomly scattered points about the zero line. Same for the plots of residuals vs. the time and climate predictors.

So controlling for temporal and climate variables when trying to estimate the association between Y and PM10 will result in well-behaved residuals, which will facilitate inferences about this association: Is the association significant? How big is the association?

The effect of car emissions, factory pollution, etc., is likely captured by PM10. Unless you want to estimate explicitly how car emission levels or factory pollution levels affect the number of deaths due to respiratory problems, you can think of PM10 as a "catch all" variable which will collect together all of these polluting influences.


text:
MATLAB ODE solver

Anyone have much knowledge on the ODE solvers in matlab? I have an ODE and I want to specificy whether the input is time or the y value for the dy/dt problem.
 Recognitions: Gold Member Science Advisor Could you please be more specific. You can only have one variable in an ODE and in this case that variable is t, i.e. the equation is dy/dt=f(t) where f is some function of t (and ONLY of t, otherwise it is a PDE). In order to have a single solution to this ODE you then only need the initial value of y at time 0, i.e. y(0).
 Cool thanks I think thats what I was looking for.


text:
Testing SACEMS, Mamabear?

Hi

I have seen different forms of this strategy, including at https://www.cxoadvisory.com/momentum-strategy/ and at https://muscularportfolios.com/mama-bear/. Both strategies are basically the same, but with a slightly different look back. The strategies have also been tested at https://allocatesmartly.com/livingstons-muscular-portfolios/
But when I test the Portfoliovisualizer strategy myself, I can't reproduce the same results.

I've tried to research the forum here to see if I can find anyone who has researched the strategy, but I can't find anything.
Is there anyone better than me at Phyton who can test how the strategy would do it?

6 responses

I tried to create some coding, based on the script I found on the forum.

The rotation strategy is simple:

• Buy the top three ETFs out of nine, which have the highest percentage return over the last four months
• These are the current ETFs: ('IWM', 'EEM', 'TLT', 'GLD', 'DBC', 'SPY', 'CAR', 'EFA', 'VNQ')
• Rebalances end of mont, around closing price
1. I'm not sure why the script only selects an ETF, I can't figure out how to change this to 3
2. This section "and data [stock] .close_price> data [stock] .mavg (200)" (line 47) is also not correct in terms of the strategy above, but I'm not sure how to remove it without getting an error message.

The only buy signal in the strategy is to keep the top three asset classes at all times.

I attach the strategy below:

# For this example, we're going to write a simple momentum script.
# When the stock goes up quickly, we're going to buy;
# when it goes down we're going to sell.
# Hopefully we'll ride the waves.

# To run an algorithm in Quantopian, you need two functions:
# initialize and handle_data
from operator import itemgetter

def initialize(context):
context.topMom = 1
context.rebal_int = 3
context.lookback = 84
set_symbol_lookup_date('2015-01-01')
#context.stocks = symbols('SPY', 'VOO', 'IVV')
#context.stocks = symbols('XLF', 'XLE', 'XLU', 'XLK', 'XLB', 'XLP', 'XLY', 'XLI', 'XLV', 'BIL')
#context.stocks = symbols('SPY', 'VEA', 'BIL')
#context.stocks = symbols('SPY', 'EFA', 'BND', 'VNQ', 'GSG', 'BIL')
context.stocks = symbols('IWM' ,'EEM', 'TLT' ,'GLD', 'DBC' , 'SPY' ,'BIL', 'EFA' ,'VNQ')
#context.stocks = symbols('DDM', 'MVV', 'QLD', 'SSO', 'UWM', 'SAA', 'UYM', 'UGE', 'UCC', 'UYG', 'RXL', 'UXI', 'DIG', 'URE', 'ROM', 'UPW', 'BIL')
# endret til endt of mont, og market close
schedule_function(rebalance,
date_rule=date_rules.month_end(),
time_rule=time_rules.market_close(hours=2))

def rebalance(context, data):
#Create stock dictionary of momentum
MomList = GenerateMomentumList(context, data)
#sell all positions
for stock in context.portfolio.positions:
order_target(stock, 0)
#create % weight
spy = symbol('SPY')
#if data[spy].price < data[spy].mavg(200):
#    order_target_percent(symbol('IEF'), 1)
#    return
weight = 0.95/context.topMom

for l in MomList:
stock = l[0]
if stock in data and data[stock].close_price > data[stock].mavg(200):
order_percent(stock, weight)
pass

def GenerateMomentumList(context, data):
MomList = []
price_history = history(bar_count=context.lookback, frequency="1d", field='price')
for stock in context.stocks:
now = price_history[stock].ix[-1]
old = price_history[stock].ix[0]
pct_change = (now - old) / old
#if now > data[stock].mavg(200):
MomList.append([stock, pct_change, price_history[stock].ix[0]])

#sort in descending order, the price change (%)
MomList = sorted(MomList, key=itemgetter(1), reverse=True)
#return only the top "topMom" number of securities
MomList = MomList[0:context.topMom]
print((MomList[0][0].symbol))

return MomList

def change(one, two):
return(( two - one)/one)
def handle_data(context, data):
pass

@ MY W .

Here is my simplified implementation of "Mama Bear" with the original setup.
But its performance lately not even close to performance of "My all weather trio".

12
Total Returns
--
Alpha
--
Beta
--
Sharpe
--
Sortino
--
Max Drawdown
--
Benchmark Returns
--
Volatility
--
 Returns 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Alpha 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Beta 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Sharpe 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Sortino 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Volatility 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
 Max Drawdown 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 12 Month
# The Mama Bear Portfolio
# original setup https://allocatesmartly.com/livingstons-muscular-portfolios/
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSETS = symbols('DBC','EEM','EFA','GLD','IWM','SHV','SPY','TLT','VNQ',); MOM = 105; N = 3; LEV = 1.0;
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
def initialize(context):
schedule_function(rebalance, date_rules.month_end(), time_rules.market_close(minutes = 65))

def rebalance(context, data):
C = data.history(ASSETS, 'price', MOM + 1, '1d')
R = C.iloc[-1] / C.iloc[0] - 1.
R = R.dropna()
wt = {}

for sec in ASSETS:
if sec in picks:
wt[sec] = LEV / N if len(picks) != 0 else 0
else:
wt[sec] = 0

for sec, target_wt in wt.items():
order_target_percent(sec, target_wt);

print(picks)
record(leverage = context.account.leverage, )
There was a runtime error.

Thank you very much, I'll check out the strategy you're referring to. As I understand "My all weather trio", it is an alternative to the 60/40 strategy - then with levraged etf and shorting against ex-US developed markets, with monthly rebalancing to a fixed percentage of the total portfolio. Very Interesting. I can post my comments under that forum thread. But what I immediately ask myself is:
- is it very sensitive to the choice of etf, specifically QQQ?
- is there something to gain from rebalancing less frequently, for example every three months?
- how sensetive is it to market crash (see Luke Izlar's posting, Apr 25, 2017)?
- I trade from a European perspective, with the Norwegian krone as the base currency. I understand that the purpose of shorting the developed markets is to create a dollar neutral portfolio, but what will this mean from a European perspective, where a dollar appreciation is positive for the foreign investor (in most cases)?

Thanks also for your help with Mamabear. I'm not surprised it has been doing worse lately, typically.

It's probably simple:
- Is there any way to improve the strategy by, for example, buying limit 0.5% above yesterday's low, and selling 0.5% lower than yesterday's high. If the order is not executed, sell at market close. (I am a little puzzled by how many of these strategies use market order. There is so much intraday volatility, that it should be possible to enter (exit) at a better price than just market close (or market open)).
- Or a version of sell open and buy close (as you do with 65 minutes from close)

Anyway, and thanks again for the help with the strategy.

@ MY W

how sensitive is it to the choice of etf, specifically QQQ, EFA?
how sensitive is it to market crash?
how sensitive is it to re balance frequency?

I just created a notebook:

Comparing "My all weather trio" with different constituents and different rebalance frequency.


text:
# §23.8 Trigonometric Series and Products

## §23.8(i) Fourier Series

If $q=e^{i\pi\omega_{3}/\omega_{1}}$, $\Im\left(z/\omega_{1}\right)<2\Im\left(\omega_{3}/\omega_{1}\right)$, and $z\notin\mathbb{L}$, then

 23.8.1 $\displaystyle\wp\left(z\right)+\frac{\eta_{1}}{\omega_{1}}-\frac{\pi^{2}}{4% \omega_{1}^{2}}{\csc}^{2}\left(\frac{\pi z}{2\omega_{1}}\right)$ $\displaystyle=-\frac{2\pi^{2}}{\omega_{1}^{2}}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{nq^{2n}% }{1-q^{2n}}\cos\left(\frac{n\pi z}{\omega_{1}}\right),$ 23.8.2 $\displaystyle\zeta\left(z\right)-\frac{\eta_{1}z}{\omega_{1}}-\frac{\pi}{2% \omega_{1}}\cot\left(\frac{\pi z}{2\omega_{1}}\right)$ $\displaystyle=\frac{2\pi}{\omega_{1}}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{q^{2n}}{1-q^{2n}% }\sin\left(\frac{n\pi z}{\omega_{1}}\right).$

## §23.8(ii) Series of Cosecants and Cotangents

When $z\notin\mathbb{L}$,

 23.8.3 $\wp\left(z\right)=-\frac{\eta_{1}}{\omega_{1}}+\frac{\pi^{2}}{4\omega_{1}^{2}}% \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}{\csc}^{2}\left(\frac{\pi(z+2n\omega_{3})}{2\omega_{1% }}\right),$
 23.8.4 $\zeta\left(z\right)=\frac{\eta_{1}z}{\omega_{1}}+\frac{\pi}{2\omega_{1}}\sum_{% n=-\infty}^{\infty}\cot\left(\frac{\pi(z+2n\omega_{3})}{2\omega_{1}}\right),$

where in (23.8.4) the terms in $n$ and $-n$ are to be bracketed together (the Eisenstein convention or principal value: see Weil (1999, p. 6) or Walker (1996, p. 3)).

 23.8.5 $\eta_{1}=\frac{\pi^{2}}{2\omega_{1}}\left(\frac{1}{6}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}{\csc% }^{2}\left(\frac{n\pi\omega_{3}}{\omega_{1}}\right)\right),$

with similar results for $\eta_{2}$ and $\eta_{3}$ obtainable by use of (23.2.14).

## §23.8(iii) Infinite Products

 23.8.6 $\sigma\left(z\right)=\frac{2\omega_{1}}{\pi}\exp\left(\frac{\eta_{1}z^{2}}{2% \omega_{1}}\right)\sin\left(\frac{\pi z}{2\omega_{1}}\right)\*\prod_{n=1}^{% \infty}\frac{1-2q^{2n}\cos\left(\pi z/\omega_{1}\right)+q^{4n}}{(1-q^{2n})^{2}},$
 23.8.7 $\sigma\left(z\right)=\frac{2\omega_{1}}{\pi}\exp\left(\frac{\eta_{1}z^{2}}{2% \omega_{1}}\right)\sin\left(\frac{\pi z}{2\omega_{1}}\right)\prod_{n=1}^{% \infty}\frac{\sin\left(\pi(2n\omega_{3}+z)/(2\omega_{1})\right)\sin\left(\pi(2% n\omega_{3}-z)/(2\omega_{1})\right)}{{\sin}^{2}\left(\pi n\omega_{3}/\omega_{1% }\right)}.$


text:
• Chow group of 1-cycles of the moduli of parabolic bundles over a curve

• # Fulltext

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pmsc/131/0022

• # Keywords

Chow groups; moduli space; parabolic bundle.

• # Abstract

We study the Chow group of 1-cycles of the moduli space of semistable parabolic vector bundles of fixed rank, determinant and a generic weight over a nonsingular projective curve over C of genus at least 3. We show that, the Chow group of 1-cycles remains isomorphic as we vary the generic weight. As a consequence, wecan give an explicit description of the Chow group in the case of rank 2 and determinant $\mathscr{O}(x)$, where $x \in X$ is a fixed point, which extends the earlier result of Choe and Hwang (Math. Z. 253 (2006) 253--281, Main theorem).

• # Author Affiliations

1. School of Mathematics, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Colaba, Mumbai 400 005, India

• # Proceedings – Mathematical Sciences

Volume 131, 2021
All articles
Continuous Article Publishing mode

• # Editorial Note on Continuous Article Publication

Posted on July 25, 2019

Click here for Editorial Note on CAP Mode

© 2021-2022 Indian Academy of Sciences, Bengaluru.