建筑卷扬机卷筒端侧板强度的理论分析与试验研究

本文依据理论分析、光弹性试验、电测试验并经数学拟合,建立了卷扬机卷筒端侧板强度计算公式.     

组合逻辑电路的无反变量输入设计

本文阐述了组合逻辑电路无反变量输入的设计思想，并通过设计实例给出了具体的设计方法与步骤．     

近终形连铸技术的发展状况

近终形连铸技术是当今冶金科技领域的一门前沿学科。本文介绍目前近终形连铸技术的发展及趋势。在世界各国的研究中，美国比较注重单辊法，日本侧重于双辊法，西欧则侧重于改进结晶器的结构和功能，开发新型铸机     

碳酸钕对AZ91合金组织的细化和腐蚀性能的影响

通过介绍实验条件实验方法及结果,并对其进行讨论,研究碳酸钕对A291合金组织的细化和腐蚀性能的影响。     

停车诱导系统架构研究

通过对基于无线通信网络的城市停车诱导系统的可行性分析,提出了系统总体架构及实现的基本功能,指出系统存在的问题及可能的解决方案。     

Ruin Probability with Variable Premium Rate and Disturbed by Diffusion in a Markovian Environment

We consider a risk model with a premium rate which varies with the level of free reserves. In this model, the occurrence of claims is described by a Cox process with Markov intensity process, and the influence of stochastic factors is considered by adding a diffusion process. The integro-differential equation for the ruin probability is derived by a infinitesimal method.     

PRELIMINARY STUDY ON RETRO-REFLECTIVE COATED PAPER BASED ON MICROGLASS BEADS

INTRODUCTIONThe micro-glass bead[1-2] is a new kind of silicate material, with good properties of chemical stability, mechanical strength as well as electro-resistance. When its diameter is below 0.08mm and the reflective index is in the range of 1.9~2.1, retro-reflective characteristics can be achieved. When a beam of ray from any direction irradiates the surface of the micro-glass beads, it can be converged at the special reflective layer consisted of focuses of micro-glass beads, owing …     

美国五次并购浪潮及其历史背景

美国历史上曾发生过五次大的并购浪潮，对这段历史进行研究，对于进一步加强对我国并购活动管理工作具有重要的指导意义。     

探索学生学习效能的提高--兼数学教学活动

学生学习效能差异很大，这和内外因的各种因素有关，文章着重激发学生学习中的内驱力和教师教学方法等外驱力的作用展开探讨．     

Newton's Easy Quadratures ``Omitted for the Sake of Brevity'

In the 1687 Principia, Newton gave a solution to the direct problem (given the orbit and center of force, find the central force) for a conic-section with a focal center of force (answer: a reciprocal square force) and for a spiral orbit with a polar center of force (answer: a reciprocal cube force). He did not, however, give solutions for the two corresponding inverse problems (given the force and center of force, find the orbit). He gave a cryptic solution to the inverse problem of a reciprocal cube force, but offered no solution for the reciprocal square force. Some take this omission as an indication that Newton could not solve the reciprocal square, for, they ask, why else would he not select this important problem? Others claim that ``it is child's play' for him, as evidenced by his 1671 catalogue of quadratures (tables of integrals). The answer to that question is obscured for all who attempt to work through Newton's published solution of the reciprocal cube force because it is done in the synthetic geometric style of the 1687 Principia rather than in the analytic algebraic style that Newton employed until 1671. In response to a request from David Gregory in 1694, however, Newton produced an analytic version of the body of the proof, but one which still had a geometric conclusion. Newton's charge is to find both ``the orbit' and ``the time in orbit.' In the determination of the dependence of the time on orbital position, t(r), Newton evaluated an integral of the form ∫dx/x <sup>n</sup> to calculate a finite algebraic equation for the area swept out as a function of the radius, but he did not write out the analytic expression for time t = t(r), even though he knew that the time t is proportional to that area. In the determination of the orbit, θ (r), Newton obtained an integral of the form ∫dx/√(1−x<sup>2</sup>) for the area that is proportional to the angle θ, an integral he had shown in his 1669 On Analysis by Infinite Equations to be equal to the arcsin(x). Since the solution must therefore contain a transcendental function, he knew that a finite algebraic solution for θ=θ(r) did not exist for ``the orbit' as it had for ``the time in orbit.' In contrast to these two solutions for the inverse cube force, however, it is not possible in the inverse square solution to generate a finite algebraic expression for either ``the orbit' or ``the time in orbit.' In fact, in Lemma 28, Newton offers a demonstration that the area of an ellipse cannot be given by a finite equation. I claim that the limitation of Lemma 28 forces Newton to reject the inverse square force as an example and to choose instead the reciprocal cube force as his example in Proposition 41. (Received August 14, 2002) Published online March 26, 2003 Communicated by G. Smith