I'm talking about ratherford pattern
136703
Rutherford's Discovery of Alpha Scattering\nI. The French Start First\n\nIn 1900, the Curies and Becquerel were studying radioactivity (Rutherford was in Canada, having just recently moved to McGill University in Montreal. He will return to England, but not for several years.) and they had occasion to determine if the alpha rays traveled in a straight line. Becquerel carried out the work.\n\nHe took some polonium (discovered by Pierre and Marie Curie) and made it into a straight line source, not the usual pencil of rays. He then used this long, narrow beam of alpha rays to make a photograph of a wire. He found that the shadows had sharp edges, even when the alpha rays had gone through a thin film of aluminum.\n\nMarie Curie gave the interpretation of the experiment. She said that this showed that the alpha particles were not scattered, that is, able to be bent from their path. Alpha rays traveled in nice, straight lines ALL THE TIME.\n\nThey were wrong.\n\nWe jump to 1903 and Rutherford announces he has succeeded in bending alpha particles with a magnetic (and an electrical) field. Becquerel, using his different techniques, checks and confirms Rutherford's results.\n\nWhat Becquerel does is aim his radioactive source (radium, now as well as polonium) at a narrow slit with a photographic plate on the other side. Of course, with no magnetic field, he gets a nice, crisp image of the narrow slit, directly in line with the radium source.\n\nWhen he turned on the magnetic field, he got Rutherford's result, that is, the alpha particles bent in the magnetic field.\n\nPart b of the figure shows the offset of the image on the photographic plate. It is not lined up directly with the open slit, labeled Y.\n\nBecquerel also reversed the magentic field's direction during the exposure and got a double image.\n\nThe images were exactly the same distance from the center and the edges of the traces ALWAYS were sharp and crisp.\n\nUp to this point, there was zero evidence of alpha particle scattering.\n\nII. Now, the evidence starts to accumulate\n\nThe work described above was all done in the early part of 1903 and it was in June of 1903 that Becquerel made the first observation that led to alpha particle scattering.\n\nHe noticed, right at the end of his experiments, that the images from the doubled set (when he reversed the magnetic field during the experiment) moved closer together as he moved the photographic plate away from the slit (that is, increased the length b in the diagram above).\n\nIt seemed that the radius of curvature of the alpha particles path through the slit Y increased as b increased, thereby moving the two images closer together.\n\nNow, Becquerel knew this equation:\n\nRH = v (M/E)\n\nR = the radius of curvature, H = the magnetic field strength, v is the velocity, and E/M is the charge-to-mass ratio of the alpha particle. (I know, I know, this equation just came out of nowhere. You'll have to trust me on this one, since I don't know how to derive the equation either.)\n\nWhat Becquerel did is assume E is constant, so this left him with the unpleasant thought that either v or M had to increase. Since it is very had to visualize the alpha particle SPEEDING UP as it traveled from its source, Bequerel decided that M must increase, that the alpha particle picked up stray matter as it traveled along.\n\nHe could not have liked it, but there wasn't anything else he could think of. Since Rutherford was busy with other work, he did not take up any checking on Becquerel's results. However, one Rutherford result will have bearing on scattering. Rutherford found (in July 1905) that the alpha particle decreased in velocity, until at about 6,000 miles per second, it would not make its presence known by ionizing gases or darkening a photographic plate.\n\nIII. We're getting there\n\nThe importance of the slowing down of the alpha particle meant that R (the radius of the curvature in a magnetic field)
584775
like this  ;;)  it'll show as the one u asked
608940
The pattern is +11, +5, +8, +11, +11\nThe next number could be 76 (+11) or the +5, +8 could begin to repeat meaning the next number could be 70 followed by 78
372674
maybe "arranged" like "to be arranged"
520879
site below is good.........:D
574505
The number is too small for a real "pattern" to emerge.\nThe digits could be the first 10 values of some sequence given by some ( many ) recurrence relation, could be ...\n\nIn order for a proper pattern to emerge, it should be much larger...
421161
http://skem9.com/layouts/index.php
168501
hey chek out in layouts whethere pic is there or not!!
540595
dang \n\nthats old school right there
546155
D)6\n\nNote the pattern:\nIf f(1) = a, f(2) = b, then\nf(3) = b-a\nf(4) = -a\nf(5) = -b\nf(6) = -b+a\nf(7) = a\nf(8) = b\n\nAt f(7), the pattern starts repeating.  Therefore, the six values are f(1) through f(6) above.\nThis really isn't a permutation/combination problem, but you can often find good answers here on Yahoo Answers!  If you have specific problems with which you have difficulty, why dont you post a few related ones in one question here?  I'm sure I or others should be able to help.\n\nYOUR FOLLOW-UP:\nThis is two small problems in one.\nFirst, find the # of ways to choose the order of the backgrounds.  We have 3 choices for the first one, then 2 choices for the second, then 1 left for the third.  Therefore, there are 3*2*1=6 ways to choose the order of the backgrounds.\n{ (b, e, r), (b, r, e), (e, b, r), (e, r, b), (r, b, e), ( r, e, b) }\nSecond, there would be 3*2*1 = 6 ways to interview the business people.  There would be 2*1 = 2 ways to interview the education people, and just 1 way to interview the recreation person.  So that would make 6*2*1 = 12 ways to interview the people after the background order is set.\n\nThe total number of ways is then 6*12=72 ways to interview all 6.
417427
neather but thair both pised off and it showes
120542
http://ladyj.purpleraindesigns.co.uk/
470538
Well, if you do claim not to be lazy, lol I do know a site that can teach you how to make them yourself...\nwww.lissaexplains.com\nOther than that, no, sorry.
288568
It is not exactly round, just looks that way.\n\nSee webpage below for the correct shape.
117553
if u like jigsaws go to WWW.jigzone.com
441897
im trying to figur3 that out too
463854
http://hermyspacelayouts.com/cartoons/5.php has a snoopy layout!