« first day (1550 days earlier)      last day (3384 days later) » 
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

10:00 PM
...most people don't write (even in chat) in a style that makes you think you are listening right to their thought process
But I admit chat is uniquely suited to it ;P
 
@KyleKanos It's g/6 on the Moon, g/3 on Mars IIRC
 
@usukidoll Generally speaking, it's guessing... I mean... experience... on how to nondimensionalize an equation
You really just have to guess your reference scales based on your understanding of what is important or what will make terms go away
 
:(. Can I post my equation on here x.x
 
Could I apply the inverse fourier transform to a diffraction pattern to get the shape of the aperture?
 
It won't render in the chat room
 
10:01 PM
Or do I need phase infromation?
 
But if you use a pastebin with LaTeX support that might make it easier
 
yes it can... I've posted before x.x
 
@tpg2114 You are aware of ChatJaX?
 
@ACuriousMind I'm aware and I don't have it :p
If I am spending that much time in the chat room that I feel the need to look at equations in them, I really need to evaluate some things in life :)
 
@jinawee I seem to recall having done this in a lab course once with the diffraction pattern only, but I'm not sure.
 
vzn
10:05 PM
@#%& sofia let me now run a spell/ grammar checker on all your chat writing....
AC excuse me for thinking...
 
@usukidoll At any rate, I can try to help but if it's outside of my domain of expertise I may not be able to help determine correct parameters
 
$\frac{d \theta}{dt} = \frac{q}{mc}-\frac{k}{mc}(\theta-T)$
theta, t - degrees and time
q - energy absorbed per time
k - energy/degrees x time
T - degrees
m - mass
c - ?
 
@vzn Chill, I'm not telling you to change your style for me.
@usukidoll c is almost certainly the speed of light.
 
lol no
 
I get something like c is in 1/(deg * s)
 
10:10 PM
c has units of length, right?
 
Hah, how many physicists does it take to figure out units...
 
Wow, haha.
 
So energy is J = N/m = (kg*m/s^2)/m = (kg/s^2)
So if q/(m*c) has units of deg/s
 
Who the heck names a quantity that appears right next to the mass c if it is not the speed of light?!
 
c would have to be 1/(deg * s) I think, unless I messed up my mental algebra
 
10:12 PM
@tpg2114 Wait, what?
 
Are we sure $\theta$ is an angle
 
Doh, it's N*m
Not /m
That still gives c a really bizarre unit
 
@ACuriousMind Well that's what the question stated. Or at least that it is measured in degrees (hopefully not Kelvin).
 
I think $c$ is a velocity squared, possible times *deg
 
Wait, who would use T in an equation that isn't temperature?
 
10:15 PM
my book is dumb : (
 
Okay @usukidoll, you need to explain your equation way more
 
Because the $\frac{q}{mc}$ term has units of deg/s, and $\frac{q}{m}$ is energy over mass, which is velocity squared
 
I definitely thought with T, m and c, plus the units of degrees and energy that we were looking at a temperature evolution equation
 
I just noticed that q is not energy, but energy/time.
 
Arrrgh
 
10:17 PM
@usukidoll Mind clarifying what exactly this equation is supposed to be?
 
hold up
 
Or even the subject matter it came from
 
The $\frac{q}{m}$ has units length^2/time^3?!
Yes
 
it's a dynamic temperature model... newton's second law of cooling. from my text
 
Is c inverse speed?
 
10:18 PM
I reasonably sure now that c, as written, has units length^2/(time^2*deg)
 
Okay, so for the future to clarify a bit, don't call the units of temperature "degrees" because it is ambiguous. It would (hopefully) be kelvin
 
Wait, so theta is temperature?
 
So some easy-to-determine non-dimensional parameters -- $T_ref = T$ so $\overline{\theta} = \theta/T$
Which means anywhere you have a $\theta$ you put in $\overline{\theta} T$
These units are funky. No idea what c is
@ACuriousMind Wait, c should be the heat capacity right?
 
@tpg2114 Oh, you're probably right
 
m*c = c_v for example
 
10:27 PM
Yes, length^2(time^2*deg) is exactly the unit of specific heat capacity.
That fits
 
Okay, much less confused now
 
wait I have the scanned page I'll upload it
 
@usukidoll Everything is constant except \theta right?
 
I think so... I'm cooking right now brb
 
@usukidoll Wait, let's back up. What don't you understand about how to non-dimensionalize this? That page gives you all the parameters
Is the question how they found them?
 
10:36 PM
@tpg2114 yeah how did they find it especially the c part which wasn't given in the book
sorry this was a bit late I had to cook... family getting hectic life here XD
 
So the first part is just like I said earlier, you need a reference temperature and you have one in your equation -- T. So $\overline{\theta} = \theta/T$ where the \overline{} means a nondimensional variable
So you plug in $\theta = \overline{\theta} T$ for $\theta$ and get:
$\frac{d \overline{\theta} T}{d t} = \frac{q}{m c} - T\frac{k}{m c}(\overline{\theta}-1)$
Where I factored out the $T$ on the last term
Now the "trick" is how to determine what to use to non-dimensionalize time. As you get better at it, you can just "spot" it. But here, you can say $\tau = t/A$ where A is unknown
So you plug in $t = \tau A$ for $t$ and get:
$T A \frac{d \overline{\theta}}{\tau} = \frac{q}{m c} - T\frac{k}{m c}(\overline{\theta} - 1)$
Now, you know the units need to work out. Your differential is non-dimensional and the $(\overline{\theta} - 1)$ is nondimensional, and both are multiplied by $T$ times something else
So you equate the coefficients as: $T A = T \frac{k}{m c}$
 
but I know how to pick new variables and name it like for example

m = theta/theta star
n= t/ t star
multiply through to get the new values of it
sub them into the equation
divide throughout and there should be some t* or theta* by itself
pick the RIGHT MATCHING unit
and then wham we can cancel
I'm trying to figure out c... subsituting with new variables is not my problem
 
Then you know how to non-dimensionalize the equation. Are you asking how to figure out the units of the terms in the equation?
 
YES!
 
Somehow the more I find out, the more confused I get about what you're asking... hah
 
10:43 PM
did you see c being given in the book? no... it had everything else though
 
Because you didn't need to know it
But if you wanted to know it:
From your dimensional equation, the left hand side has units of [degrees]/[time]
 
yes I want to find out what C is ^_^

mhm yes
 
So your $q/(m c)$ has to also have units of [degrees]/[time]
And your $k/(m c)*(\theta - 1)$ must also have units of [degrees]/[time]
 
yeah ^_^
but q - energy absorbed per time which is calories /time
m - mass but it also said units of time... it's also grams... so I'm missing degrees here for q/mc
mhm, but I can see the k/mc(theta-T) as having degrees/time... it's q/mc which is tricky to see unless I know what c really is
 
And since you know all the units of everything but c, you just plug in units and treat them as variables. So: q = [energy]/[time]
 
10:46 PM
so do I solve for c?
 
And [energy] = [force][distance] = [mass][distance]^2/[time]
Yeah, you just plug in the units like they are variables and solve for [units of c]
 
so to solve for c.. I have to make something like

q/mc

calories/time / grams x c

and solve for c, but it looks sort of messy
do I need to set up an equation to solve for c?
 
1
Q: Least Action Principle (Classical and Quantum Theory)

user40689I) My first question would be "why should classical systems obey the principle of least action ?" When we find out the propagator in quantum physics, we find the amplitude to be equal to the sum over all possible paths, weighted by the phase $e^{iS/\hbar}$. Then one arrives at the conclusion that...

Too many questions and too broad to be useful on Phys.SE?
 
Set it up like:
$[degrees]/[time] = [mass][length]^2/([time]^3*[mass]*[units of c])$
And solve for [units of c]
And you'll find that [units of c] = [length]^2/([time]^2*[degrees])
 
@Qmechanic I am inclined to agree, but I don't feel strongly about it.
 
10:53 PM
And this is called dimensional-analysis, not non-dimensionalization. That's why we were all going a different direction with trying to answer you
 
so it does require those ... what is that called it was in M L T or something.. I saw a list and it showed the values of it... I was watching about the buckingham pi theorem which was similar, but the calculations are really lengthy
 
Yes, Buckingham Pi
 
but my dumb professor didn't teach it :(
 
And yes, usually one would use M L T etc
Well you don't need to know the units of c to non-dimensionalize that equation
 
yeah when I read about it it looked so easy... but it wasn't mentioned period in the lectures -_-
I don't need to know? why?
 
10:56 PM
Read this again:
18 mins ago, by tpg2114
So the first part is just like I said earlier, you need a reference temperature and you have one in your equation -- T. So $\overline{\theta} = \theta/T$ where the \overline{} means a nondimensional variable
That whole section there
When you equate the coefficients, you get the factor that makes time non-dimensional and you can proceed to non-dimensionalize the equation. Without needing to know what the actual units are for c
 
cool :D
 
You just know that \frac{k}{m c} has units of [time]
 
YES! ^________^
 
And so it doesn't matter one bit what the units of c are for this instance
 
ok
 
10:58 PM
Sorry, units of 1/[time]
Which you knew that anyway actually because you knew the left hand side was [degrees]/[time]
So all the units on the right had to be that also
And since (\theta - T) has units of [degrees]
Then k/(mc) must have units of 1/[time]
 
yes so that will make it degrees/time
 
Right. So hopefully what we found from this whole exercise -- non-dimensionalization is different from dimensional analysis; you don't need to know the units of everything to find non-dimensional parameters (but it helps to check if you are right); degrees is an ambiguous unit because it could be a length (rotation) or a temperature
 
COOL! :D
 
11:34 PM
@ACuriousMind : ahhh! What did you do? Restore please the editing that I did. Can you? It was beautifully organized, with numbering of the equations. How can one refer to non-numbered equations. Ohhhh !
@ACuriousMind : it was so nice, all the equations aligned, a pleasure !
 
@Sofia I, uh, used the proper \tag{} command to create the labels. They're on the right hand side now
 
@ACuriousMind are they numbered? It's difficult to write an entire prose for specifying to which equation I refer.
 
@Sofia Can you not see the numbers? They're numbered just like this: $$ x = y \tag{n}$$
 
@ACuriousMind not yet.
 
I approved of your idea to number the equations, and merely used the proper TeX command instead of putting them in by hand as you did.
 
11:39 PM
@ACuriousMind Ohhh ! It was so nicely organized, all the equations aligned. Well, is it a way to align equations so as to begin on a same column? It's not convenient to insert $ \ \ \ $
 
Well, you cannot align left/right over several seperate $$...$$ blocks.
But preferred typography is to center equations, so the way it is without anyone doing anything is fine, actually
Ah, now I understand what all the \ were doing in your edit
 
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

« first day (1550 days earlier)      last day (3384 days later) »