- ベストアンサー
和訳
The equation (2) will only be applied to the cases where (1) does not apply this is when e1 is either a Sub or a Lit expression. 上の文の where～is までがうまく訳せません。(この区切り方でいいんですかね?) 式(2)はe1がSubまたはLit式の時の～の場合にだけ適用される。 のような感じだとは思うのですが、this is のあたりで引っ掛かってしまいます。 これは一体どんな訳になるのでしょうか?
- wongfeifong
- お礼率84% (22/26)
- 英語
- 回答数1
- ありがとう数1
- みんなの回答 （1）
- 専門家の回答
質問者が選んだベストアンサー
ちょっと取っ付きにくい硬い英文ですが。区切りはこうなります。 The equation (2) will only be applied to the cases where (1) does not apply, this is when e1 is either a Sub or a Lit expression. 式(1)で解けない場合、式(2)を用いる。但しe1がSubまたはLitである時に用いること。
関連するQ&A
- この英文の和訳をお願いします。
The second feature seen from Fig.11 is that the profile of R(e,0) does not depend significantly on r_p (for r_p=0.005 to 0.0002). Only an exception is found near e≒1, but this is, in some sense, a singular point in R(e,0), which appears in a narrow region around e≒1 ( in fact, for e=0.9 and 1.2, there is no appreciable difference between r_p=0.005 and 0.0002). Thus, neglecting such fine structures in R(e,0), we can conclude that R(e,0) does depend very weakly on r_p. In other words, the dependence on r_p of <P(e,0)> is well approximated by that of <P(e,0)>_2B given by Eq. (28). Now, we will phenomenalogically show what physical quantity is related to the peak at e≒1. We introduce the collisional flux F(e,E) for orbits with e and E, where E is the Jacobi energy given by (see Eq. (15)) E=e^2/2-(3b^2)/8+9/2. (31) The collisional flux F(e,E) is defined by F(e,E)=(2/π)∫【‐π→π】p_col(e,i=0, b(E), τ)dτ. (32) From Eqs. (11) and (31), we obtain <P(e,0)>=∫F(e,E)dE. (33) In Fig.12, F(e,E) is plotted as a function of E for the cases of e=0, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0. We can see from this figure that in the case of e=1 a large fraction of low energy planetesimals contributes to the collisional rate compared to other cases (even to the cases with e<1). In general, in the case of high energy a solution for the three-body problem can be well described by the two-body approximation: in other words, in the case of low energy a large difference would exist between a solution for the three-body problem and that in the two-body approximation. As shown before, this difference appears as an enhancement of the collisional rate. Thereby an enhancement factor peak is formed at e≒1 where a large fraction of low-energy planetesimals contributes to the collisional rate. よろしくお願いいたします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願いします。
初めまして。なんとなくは分かるのですが・・・ 和訳お願いできますでしょうか。 As is expected from the features of the scattering, the direct collision with the planet never occurs for the cases |bi|≧5 and |bi|≦1.5, because in these cases a particle cannot enter the Hill sphere. The initial values of bi, with which a particle collides with the planet are marked on the upper abscissa of Figs. 1(a), and (b). However, for all the cases where bi lies in the collision band, shown in Fig. 1(a), the direct collision does not always occur. When the band is decomposed, the fine structure appears as seen in Figs. 3(a). Furthermore, the decomposed band is found to have also a fine structure of a higher hierarchy. 以上です、宜しくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 英訳と和訳の問題の自分の回答を見てください
方程式とは、両方の辺が等しい数値式である。 An equation is a mathematical expression in which the two sides balance. 英訳書いてみたのですが正しいでしょうか？ 自分の書いた文章のどこがおかしいかを聞きたいです。 もう一つ質問があります。 訳なんですが、 You can do this in an ugly hackish way by uploading a GIF file. あなたはギフファイルのアップロードをすることによって、醜い悪質な方法がこれでできる。 という訳ではないですよね・・ in an ugly hackish way は thisにかかっていると考えています。 by uploading a GIF file は can doにかかってる、かな・・。 訳と文の構造の解説をして欲しいです。 おねがいします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
Now, in answer to this objection, I have only to say that no one can have a more lively appreciation than myself of the supreme importance of experimental or historical veri fication, in all cases where the possibility of such verification is attainable. But in cases where such verification is not attainable, what are we to do ? We may clearly do either of two things. We may either neglect to investigate the sub ject at all, or we may Jo our best to investigate it by employ ing the only means of .investigation which are at our disposal. Of these two courses there can be no doubt which is the one that the scientific spirit prompts. The true scientific spirit desires to examine everything, and if in any case it is refused the best class of instruments wherewith to conduct the examination, it will adopt the next best that are available. In such cases science clearly cannot be forwarded by neglect ing to use these instruments, while her cause may be greatly advanced by using them with care. This is proved by the fict that, in the science of psychology, nearly all the con siderable advances which have been made, have been made, not by experiment, but by observing mental phenomena and reasoning from these phenomena deductively. In such cases, therefore, the true scientific spirit prompts us, not to throw away deductive reasoning where it is so frequently the onlyinstrument available, but rather to cany it with us, and to use it as not abusing it.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- この文章の和訳をお願いします。
Equation (17) shows that the guiding center intersects the y-axis at y_1=8/b^2 (where b(r)=0) and turns back to infinity (see Fig.1). On the other hand, the radius of an elliptic oscillation around the guiding center is equal to 2e in the y-direction. Thus, it follows that if (y_1-2e) is greater than a certain distance (say, 2.5 times as large as the Hill radius) no particle enters the Hill sphere and collide with the protoplanet. Inversely, for the occurrence of collision, (y_1-2e)<2.5 must be statisfied; explicitly we have b_min^2>b_min*^2≒8/(2.5+2e). ・・・・・・・・・・(18) Equation (18) is confirmed by Table 1, where b_min* and numerically found b_min are shown for representative e. よろしくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳をお願いします
Inscribe in a given cone, the height of which is equal to the radius of the base, a cylinder (a) whose volume is a maximum; (b) whose lateral area is a maximum. The height of the cone is 15 cm. The maximum volume of the cylinder is ＿＿＿＿cm3. In the curve to which the equation is x2 + y2 = 11, find the values of x at those points where the slope = 0.95. の二文です
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- either か too かどちらを選んだらいいのかわかりません。
Does anybody think A is A, too/either? too か either かどちらを選ぶべきでしょうか？よろしくお願いします。
- 締切済み
- 英語
- whereについて
お世話になっております。 以下についてお教え頂けないでしょうか。 In cases where a telephone is not working, calls are autmatically directed to the voice mail system. (1)In cases where a telephoneとありますが、どうしてここでwhereが使われるでしょうか？ cases を場所と考えるのでしょうか？辞書でも調べましたがこのような例文はありませんでした。 (2)In cases where a telephone is not workingは文法的にどう考えたらよろしいでしょうか？ Inから始まっていますので前置詞句であっていますでしょうか？ 何卒宜しくお願い申し上げます。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
It is, then, adaptive action by a living organism in cases where the inherited machinery of the nervous system does not furnish data for our prevision of what the adaptive action must necessarily be — it is only in such cases that we recognize the element of mind. In other words, ejectively con sidered, the distinctive element of mind is consciousness, the test of consciousness is the presence of choice, and the evidence of choice is the antecedent uncertainty of adjustive action between two or more alternatives. To this analysis it is, however, needful to add that, although our only criterion of mind is antecedent uncertainty of adjustive action, it does not follow that all adjustive action in which mind is con cerned should be of an antecedently uncertain character; or, which is the same thing, [it does'nt follow] that because some such action may be of an antecedently certain character, we should on this account regard it as non-mental. Many adjustive actions which we recognize as mental are, nevertheless, seen before hand to be, under the given circumstances, inevitable ; but analysis would show that such is only the case when we have in view agents whom we already, and from independent videuce, regard as mental.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
お礼
早速の回答ありがとうございます。 this is when が区切りのポイントになってたんですね。通りで訳せないわけだ^^; ありがとうございました!