Solutions To Test Two of Course One

1)(For Initial Two Pictures, See Handwritten test solutions.)

                   
If these hooks, due to the lack of rigidity between these, slipped along the borne

tangential surface that interconnected them, then these hooks would dually slide off of

each other along the shared topographical region of borne tangency.



2)Wave-Tug in the direction of the hooks’ individual changes in the second derivative of

curvature, taken individually yet dually, that appertains to a topographical dual position

where there is an actual limit of curvature along the touching surfaces of the hooks,

particularly if the reverse directional pull pulled these hooks upon each other, would be

advantatious toward keeping the hooks together.

Wave-Tug that is directed away from the actual change in the second derivative of the

curvature of the hooks, which would slide the hooks’ tips toward each other, particularly

if there was a torsional three-dimensional force that produced a lack of borne tangency,

would be disadvantatious to keeping the hooks together. Additional force of one hook

upon another would increase the chance of the second hook to be pulled in the first

hook’s direction. Additional force of the second hook upon the first hook would increase

the chance of the first hook to be pulled in the second hook’s direction



3)In a polar diagram, when two points are within the same ellipse yet not touching, these

points are relatively near. With the same polar diagram, if these points were complete

yet touching, these points would be very near. If these points are of two totally different

ellipses, then these points are far.



4)(For correlative pictures, See Handwritten Solutions.)

If there were two particles that were 50 ellipses away, that would make all four points in

A and B near.

If two particles were complete yet touching, that would make all four of the points of A

and B appear far.



5)The “neighborhood” of my writing utensil is the paper I am writing on, my hand I am

writing with, and the air existent that touches my writing utensil.



6)The local neighborhood of a molecule of the air I am breathing are the other molecules

of the air I am breathing, my body that absorbs the air, and the superfluous dust in the air

I am breathing.



7)Electrons spin antisymmetrically so that these may be at different spots at the same

time. That is the Pauli Exclusion Principle. You can not find with an expectation value

of “1” (pure certainty) where an electron as at and what it is giving off at the same time.

The Pauli Exclusion Principle is always true, yet, via extrapolating substringular activity,

one may basically have a good idea of where an electron is at and what it is giving

off at the same time. Syncronous electrical flow may provide an expectation value to

determine this with virtual certainty.



8)Adjacent superstrings oscillate antisymmetrically so as not to intrude upon each

other (Pauli Exclusion Principle). You can not pinpoint a superstring’s position and its



scattering and requantification at the same time (Heisenburg Principle). Superstings

constantly change in differential clause per group metric, and superstrings recycle

on account of the activity of ultimon flow. Superstrings, even though these reverse

fractorially form a tense of inertia, are never inert both during and in-between instantons.