The number zero

if zero is considered to be a number in its own right then it can lead to odd results when trying to perform certain mathematical operations with it ,such as dividing by zero.

WHAT DO YOU GET WHEN YOU DIVIDE A  FINITE NUMBER BY ZERO?

There are likely to be different responses to the question such as "it can't be done"or the answer is "indeterminate" or even "infinite".A good answer would be that from an applied maths point of view dividing by zero is a futile exercise.

WHY FUTILE?

As an example consider an equation of the type:

                                             y=k/x          (k could be a constant)


We could describe that as x gets smaller y gets bigger.It is a good description and one that can be used in both pure and applied maths.But at some point the two branches of maths will begin to differ.Pure(theoretical) mathematicians may consider that x can continue to get smaller,it can approach zero and even, perhaps, reach zero.
Applied mathematicians will know that there are limits to the smallness of x and that x cannot reach zero.Exactly what those limits are depend on the equation under consideration and it should be the job of an applied mathematician to try to gain a full awareness of the limitations of the equations used.

Where physicists go wrong (an introduction)

The title may be a bit strong and perhaps it would be better to describe this introductory section as "some things that physicists have overlooked".Some of the said "things" that I have noticed are not trivial and really should be considered and considered serously.

The first little section will point out some of the misconceptions concerned with binding energy.This section will be published here very soon,tomorrow possibly,or perhaps not.

Time for a drop of jollop now.I'm going to go posh and partake of a port.

Nighty night

Well, it could be the Higgs

It's the 8th July and,well,it could be the Higgs(ooh deja vu).Certain science journalists and science popularisers seem to be claiming that it is the Higgs whereas Cern is rightly being more cautious and amongst other things stating that more testing is needed.
Whatever the outcome it seems reasonably certain that a new particle has been detected.Physics theorists will now be able to pick up their pencils and try to figure out things  in more detail due to them being armed with this new experimental data.In this regard I am going to publish here a series of physics snippets(one every now and then) that they need to consider when doing their sums and whatever else stuff they do.It's just a few little odds and ends that some of them may have overlooked in the past.

ps Why do certain scientists and science popularisers tend to present certain things as if they are absolute immutable truths.Said people need a major injection of skepticism mixed,perhaps,with a dash of crackpottery.Just rambling here,oh and make sure you read the bit below before you read this bit.

Higgs found or Higgs fail?

It's July 4 2012 and  it seems that Cern have announced the apparent discovery of something with an effective mass of approximately 125GeV.Could it be the Higgs boson,the so called God particle(or goddammit particle as some prefer to call it)or could it be something else?I haven't seen any detailed reports yet but it seems quite interesting so I might look into it.
Yes,I have just decided to extend my knowledge of the standard model and do a bit more reading up on it.Before I do so just one question comes to mind:
If the Higgs boson is instrumental in setting up the Higgs field which is instrumental in endowing particles with mass then from where does the mass of the Higgs boson come from?

(I know what you're thinking.You're thinking that I'm just being daft or trying to wind you up.If you're not thinking that you could be thinking something else)