Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008

On Jul 22, 7:08 am, freesolutionmanu...@yahoo.com wrote:

Yes send me an email to that address. there should be enoughf room, im
not sure how to tell tho.

And i just use the solutions manuel to help me when i get stuck. All
my professors at my other school make the solutions manuel available
to all the students at the library. Im just taking a summer class at
the local community college and the professor is a crappy teacher and
actually grades homwork  and takes points off for mistakes on
homework, but wont help you with it if you get stuck , and just refers
us to the examples in the chapter.

HAHAHAHA!
 Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

" In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day terminology)
is the speed of light c-v or c+v.  In both systems the speed of light is c."
-- cretin Jimmy Black fmlast3@organization.edu.

According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein (who failed college)
did not write the equation he wrote.

"Easy: he did NOT say that." - cretin harald.vanlintelButNotThis@epfl.ch
According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation he wrote.

According to xxein:
It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.

According to Lamenting Shubert:
Why do you want to know?

That's true, here you are spamming.

On Jul 22, 6:00 pm, allen24...@mint.us.to wrote:

Hope Mr. Fong does.

That is totally correct, PD.  Traditionally, hiring firms have
required college transcripts on applications for professional
employment, but now during the recession, they are becoming much
stricter having been burned too often in the past. In todays economy,
they can't afford to take a chance, so beyond a resume, employers will
often contract professors to obtain their take of the student's
capabilities. Sometimes private detective agencies are hired on the
QT, because so much risk to them is at stake. It's comparable to the
research that goes into a government security check run for a high
level security clearance.

The issue for these hiring firms is how far to trust what someone
states on an employment application, or the quality of his/her college
transcript.  You usually speak with with several professors in the
graduates history, and determine if his/her test performance was
greater than their score on lab reports, and if their performance on
mid-terms or finals was remarkably higher than expected. It would not
suprise me that a history of their internet posts would also be
carefully studied, although I don't know for a fact that this is
common practice.

What I can share is that the personell department today only screens
applicants for their satifcation of minimal qualification for the
positions, and then passes these names onto the hiring manager of the
department in which the opening exists.  Appicants should realize that
with any of the larger firms, the hiring manager will have personally
seen all of the personell departments reports, plus have a team of
interviewers under him that will interview each candidate.  That will
elimate maybe 60% percent of the job candidates.  Those that pass the
screen will have an interview with the "boss", who will in turn ask
some 'searching' questions in the form of a casual interview.

Trust me, you cannot 'cheat sheet' your way though the questions that
this guy will casually ask, and most of them will relate to you
fundamental knowledge of the technology involved.  They focus on your
basic comprehension of the subject.

Here are a couple that I remember:

First, for an electrical engineering candidate -- Suppose that you
were desigining a pulse tranformer that functioned with a 1-
millisecond square wave input pulse, what would be your thoughts about
the design of the transformer's magnetic core. Explain why?

(Passing anwer: "I would design the magnetic core with sufficient
dimensionson and permeability not to become saturated.)

Second, for a computer science graduate, the question would be (two
parts):

Explain the nature of a 'hash' check, and it's limitations.

The second part of this question would be to ask the candidate to
expalin why ERCC coding is employed, and what are its practical uses
and drawbacks.

Note, that this level of intviewing for an entry level postion that
pays between 20K and 30K a year, the hiring manger really does not
give a rats a.s if you have memorize the exams, but how competent you
are in the subject that college is supposed to have taught you.

Now, the fact is that if you can answer either of these two questions,
you become an interesting job candidate.  At that point the interview
will be less confrontational and move conversational. At that point it
will more focus the interviewer who has already decided to extend you
a job offer, and more on which of his multiple teams you would be the
best fit.  Job candidate seem to realize the point when the know that
they have made the cut.

Now, in closing, I will tell you this, when you are applying for a
professional position in a large company, you first step should be
focused on getting past the personall department, who actually don't
have clue beyond checking applicant credentials.  In a job search,
foucus your attention on avoiding these people, because while they
cannot get you in, that can deep six your job application.  So, it is
that level that your personality and glib toungue comes into play. You
may even want to show up for your interview with personell bearing a
discrete floral arrangement the receptionist.  She may put in a good
word for you that sets you aside from the rest of the pack, or maybe
put you at the head of the line.

Still do anything required to get an interview with the head guy, and
generally the head guy that calls all of the hiring shots is not
obvious, and intentionally so.

Enough said, but good luck on your interviews.

P.s., Using a cheat sheet is not that damning if you managed to walk
out of college knowing the basic material.  The problem is that most
students that use cheats to graduate simply wasted at great expense
(usually at someone else's eexpense), during which they they learned
nothing,

Hary C.