« first day (1756 days earlier)      last day (3172 days later) » 

12:00 AM
@FenderLesPaul Ubi
@ACuriousMind Ok, what is the German word for impulse then?
 
I'm out of languages
where
 
@0celo7 As in "I felt an impulse to do something"? Drang, probably.
 
@ACuriousMind No as in $\int F\,\mathrm{d}t$
 
@0celo7 Ah. Impulsübertrag
 
12:07 AM
@ACuriousMind how do you say $\hbar$ in German?
h strich?
 
h quer
 
ok
 
h strich would be $h'$
 
h queer
 
^ sounds queer :P
 
12:09 AM
@ACuriousMind Historically, is this how Einstein developed the $E=\hbar\omega$? Probably not considering the year he did that in...how did he actually do it?
 
I have no idea about the historical development, you'll have to ask @Danu that
 
Most of Einstein's original work has been paved over anyway, right?
 
pretty sweet paper
 
I have "to read" lists on two computers spanning three operating systems.
This is getting out of hand.
 
haha
let me help you then
 
12:14 AM
Welcome to the big leagues kid :P
Where things get out of hand fast.
 
@0celo7 read this as well: arxiv.org/pdf/0708.2488v1.pdf
in all seriousness that first paper is not instructive it's just a neat topic
 
I still have psych homework D:
 
but the second paper is really, really cool
 
stahp
 
Psych is fun
 
12:17 AM
I also have to learn Galois theory.
 
Galwow theory
 
-_-
Why so far behind already?
 
When Dr. Freire was discussing cubic plane curves he asked why all cubics have solutions. Rather than saying something simple like intermediate value theorem or something less simple like fund. theom. alg., I said Galois theory.
 
silly rabbit
trix are for kids
skyriiim
 
Problem is, I have not the slightest clue about Galois theory.
 
12:19 AM
streaaam
 
@0celo7 Why do you think it is the reason, then?
 
Also that game is broken for some reason
@ACuriousMind I know it is.
Ok, I have not the slighest clue $+\epsilon$.
 
user54412
@0celo7 Do you even know group theory? Cuz it's kinda a prereq.
 
@0celo7 Planck actually developed it first; Einstein applied it to photons. You might want to read Planck's Nobel lecture, which contains some historical insights. After your homework, that is - it's quite long.
 
user54412
(And no, representations are not group theory)
 
12:22 AM
I have a dover book that starts out from basic set theory and works up to Galois theory.
No time for that though.
And I don't even really know representation theory :'(
Also I told him I would read Hatcher...I wonder if he even remembers that convo
 
@0celo7 I think it isn't. The reason is that if a complex number solves the cubic, its complex conjugate also does. The fundamental theorem tells you it has three complex solutions, and so one of them has to be real.
 
@ACuriousMind Yes but you can use Galois theory to find the solutions, no?
I knew I should have said fundamental theorem...that's something I know.
 
You can talk about Galois theory and say that is because the complex numbers are only of degree two over the real numbers, but that's not really a "deeper reason", it's just rephrasing.
@0celo7 Galois theory isn't really about finding the solutions.
 
Is it about showing that they can be found?
 
user54412
Galois theory restricts what solutions you can find by finite algorithms involving radicals. I assure you 5th-order polynomials still have roots.
 
12:25 AM
He probably thinks I'm an idiot now...
Welp
 
obe
lol
 
oh @0celo7
here are the notes I took for first lecture of QFT in curved spacetime
 
yeah, yeah, he knows I'm an idiot now
oh
 
it wasn't too interesting though
 
what happened
 
12:29 AM
but here it is
 
is it algebraic a la Wald?
 
no the official textbook is Birrel and Davies
 
ok
 
@0celo7 . . . Or just see this question. The original paper is better - Planck wrote the entropy of a resonator in terms of its energy - $$S=k\left[\left( 1+\frac{U}{\varepsilon} \right) \log \left(1+\frac{U}{\varepsilon} \right)-\frac{U}{\varepsilon} \log \frac{U}{\varepsilon} \right]$$ - then applied Wien's displacement law.
 
12:29 AM
+1 on the reading list
+more on the reading list
 
I got lazy in some parts
 
damn...
"quantum fluctuations"
@FenderLesPaul pls define
 
::eye twitch::
 
gotta love dem quantum fluctuations
QUANTUM FLUCHEWASHUNS
 
user54412
@HDE226868 Oh cool. He uses CGS units, so only astronomers today have any idea what he's talking about.
 
12:32 AM
holy crap do you TeX while in the lecture?
 
"Planck scale is the minimum distance to which an object can be localized" [citation needed]
 
yeah ACM, destroy his notes
what is a unitarity bound
 
yeah I TeX them in lecture
which is why it's a bit messy
 
@HDE226868 TeX is for grown ups :P
 
I still have to look up Unitarity bound
 
12:34 AM
dude I could not TeX that quick
just ask the quantum guru
 
professor mentioned that without explaining it in detail
 
@ACuriousMind
 
@ACuriousMind what that be
 
@ChrisWhite I did see that. Ergs are annoying. I don't know how widespread CGS units were back then, though.
 
It's a bound that arises from requiring the theory to be unitary, duh! :P
 
12:35 AM
damn
 
see that's why you don't have a friend mouse
 
crap like that
 
@0celo7 I screwed up a "\left(" or "\right)" somewhere.
Oh, it just didn't like using the "{" and "}" as brackets.
 
mod edit power saves the day!
 
12:36 AM
cheater...
 
@ChrisWhite SI units didn't get their full start until the mid-20th century, so it was okay to use CGS units.
@0celo7 Well, yes.
Although apparently the meter-kilogram-second system was still doing quite well circa 1900.
I wonder why Planck used CGS.
 
cuz Planck a real thug
 
Because he was a curmudgeonly old man
:= real thug
 
You mean =:, not :=, right?
 
user54412
CGS sets $1/4\pi\epsilon_0 = 1$, which is mighty convenient for E&M
 
12:39 AM
@ACuriousMind so you're not gonna elaborate on that?
 
@0celo7 He was 42-ish when I published his paper, so I guess some of us might consider him old then.
 
@0celo7 No can do.
 
@ACuriousMind if I meant that, I would have written it
 
So, you want to define "curmudgeonly old man" by "real thug"?
 
how old was Einstein when he published GR?
 
12:40 AM
Would make a bit more sense to me the other way around
 
@ChrisWhite So, it would be for simplicity, like using the typical geometrized units of $c=G=1$?
@FenderLesPaul 36.
 
history nerd...
 
Assuming you're talking about his 1915 paper.
 
yeah
cool thanks
 
He began learning from Grossmann about five years before, IIRC.
 
12:41 AM
why have I seen 1916 for GR?
 
damn that's pretty young for such a revolutionary theory
 
I thought that was old
aren't people best in their mid-20s?
 
user54412
@0celo7 Just keep telling yourself you're not past the peak :P
3
 
I suppose but I feel like 36 is pretty good for coming up with a theory like GR in 1915
after doing all the other stuff he did in his 20s
 
Well, he came up with SR at 26.
 
12:43 AM
oo
 
And his entire annus mirabilis.
 
oh no
 
user54412
::checks age::
 
at least my LA TA likes me...
you people are mean
 
user54412
D:
 
12:43 AM
LATA
 
lin. alg. teach. assist.
 
Hey, Riemann came up with a coherent theory of non-Euclidean geometry for his habilitation, so he probably beats Einstein.
 
teach.assist.fail.
USArmy
 
holy shit I did not take a straightedge to college
 
user54412
did you just use the word "straightedge"?
 
12:45 AM
aha I have a debit card
yes...so?
is that not a word
did I misspell it?
 
damn I haven't heard that word uttered since like 4th grade
 
I feel "ruler" is more usual, isn't it?
 
user54412
I've never heard someone younger than... old... use it
 
I was taught to use "straightedge", too.
 
"all diagrams must be drawn with straightedge for full credit"
straight from the TA
who is like 20 for this class
 
12:46 AM
someone reccomend a James Taylor song to learn to sing/play
or just name your favorite James Taylor song if you have one
 
"Carolina in My Mind".
 
I had a James taylor in my euro history class
dunno if that's him
 
Although I haven't heard it in years.
"Fire and Rain" gets tedious after a while.
 
user54412
@FenderLesPaul You edited. I was going to link to all James Taylors
 
@HDE226868 Carolina in my mind is a great one! I don't know that one, I'll give it a go
@ChrisWhite haha yeah I realized that would happen :p
 
12:49 AM
I have no idea who this is
 
"Something in the way she moves" is my favorite James Taylor song
 
@ACuriousMind because you don't know or...?
 
@0celo7 he's a fingerstyle guitarist and singer/songwriter
 
James Vernon Taylor (born March 12, 1948) is an American singer-songwriter and guitarist. A five-time Grammy Award winner, Taylor was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2000. Taylor achieved his breakthrough in 1970 with the No. 3 single "Fire and Rain" and had his first No. 1 hit the following year with "You've Got a Friend", a recording of Carole King's classic song. His 1976 Greatest Hits album was certified Diamond and has sold 12 million US copies. Following his 1977 album, JT, he has retained a large audience over the decades. His commercial achievements declined slightly until...
 
reading list ++
dammit people
 
12:51 AM
lmfao
 
I first heard him perform on a TV recording of him at the Troubadour along with Carol King.
So that's my memory of him playing live.
 
at least you got to see him live :)
 
@FenderLesPaul Well, no, it was on TV.
 
oh oops misread that
 
And I was about 9 at the time.
Anyway, gotta go. 'Night, all.
 
12:54 AM
he and Paul Simon are definitely my most favorite acoustic guitarists
night!
 
@FenderLesPaul I've forgotten, what does it mean for a theory to be unitary in the first place?
 
The S-matrix has to be unitary
 
oh of course
...so why does that make negative norm states forbidden?
 
There are no negative norm states in a Hilbert space
 
ok
so why in, e.g. string theory, do we make sure the negative norm states are not present in the critical dimension
I've never really understood why that's so important
or heck even in Gupta Bleuler quant
 
1:01 AM
What do you mean? We don't want negative norm states because we want a Hilbert space for the theory
 
well what does that have to do with unitarity?
I feel like I have asked something profoundly stupid
and now ACM is just banging his head against the wall
 
Well, you can't really talk about unitarity in a space with states of negative norm, because "unitary operator" is defined as an operator that preserves the inner product on a Hilbert space, and the inner product on a Hilbert space is defined to be positive-definite
 
ok
@ACuriousMind so the point of Gupta Bleuer is that we have norms which are like $\eta_{\mu\nu}$, right?
and we want to eliminate the negative ones arising from timelike polarizations
 
@0celo7 negative norm physical states are not allowed
 
why do we do that? why do we not consider that Hilbert space might not be suited for QFT?
 
1:09 AM
but e.g. ghosts can have (and do have) negative norm
 
ok why do physical states always have positive norm
 
@0celo7 You may well consider that, but then you'd need to invent a whole new kind of quantum theory that doesn't require a Hilbert space
 
@0celo7 for the reason @ACuriousMind mentioned
 
can you do QM without a hilbert space?
 
And the negative norm states only really arise because we blundered into the quantization process without properly considering how one quantizes theories with constraints.
@0celo7 Nope. Many of the theorems about operators as based on the norm, well, actually being a norm, which requires it to be positive-definite.
 
1:15 AM
can you ELI5 why the norm should be positive (because operator theory is not good, nor is because you'd have to invent new QM)
 
Shouldn't you be doing pysch HW?
 
@0celo7 Well, the most obvious reason is that the Born rule doesn't give probabilities - it gives back negative "probabilities", and what the hell are you supposed to do on zero-norm states?
 
@FenderLesPaul yes but
but
 
You also can't properly talk about observables - you can't guarantee diagonalizability
 
@ACuriousMind this is pissing me off
everyone says negative probabilities
 
1:22 AM
You can't guarantee the time evolution is $\mathrm{e}^{-\mathrm{i}Ht}$ because Stone's theorem isn't there.
 
but the Born rule is squared
 
@0celo7 There's a denominator if the state isn't normalized!
 
Who's saying negative probabilities?
 
Wiki, SE
@ACuriousMind hmm
 
can you give an example?
like a link
 
1:23 AM
In quantum field theory, the Gupta–Bleuler formalism is a way of quantizing the electromagnetic field. The formulation is due to theoretical physicists Suraj N. Gupta and Konrad Bleuler. Let's start with a single photon first. A basis of the one-photon vector space (we'll explain why it's not a Hilbert space below) is given by the eigenstates |k,εμ〉 where k, the 4-momentum is null (k2=0) and the k0 component, the energy, is positive and εμ is the unit polarization vector and the index μ ranges from 0 to 3. So, k is uniquely determined by the spatial momentum . Using the bra–ket notation, we equip...
 
The full glory of the rule should be written as $\frac{(v,w)(w,v)}{(v,v)(w,w)}$ for the probability of $v$ to be in the state $w$
 
@ACuriousMind I get it now
thanks
 
@0celo7 this is akin to the negative norm property of ghosts when dealing with gauge theories
it has to do with not properly taking into account the redundant degrees of freedom when doing the path integral
i.e. physical negative norm states are still not introduced into the Hilbert space
so s'all good
 
1:37 AM
alright James Taylor time
 
2:32 AM
Hey hey
Ahah, the Gupta formalism
Poor Gupta
 
why
do you think his name is funny or something
 
You are alive and well, I see @Slereah
 
The Gupta formalism, aka "Canonical quantization of the EM field is too complicated, so in this book we will use path integral quantization"
Nobody wants to talk about the Gupta formalism
I had to dig deep to find it
 
We did it in my QFT course before ever talking about the path integral
 
and yes you can totally do QM without a Hilbert space
Hilbert spaces are just the standard way of doing QM
 
2:35 AM
dude I can't figure out how to submit this online quiz
wtf
@ACuriousMind why won't you explain unitarity bound :(
 
@0celo7 I have no idea what it might be in that specific instance
 
Do you mean like PATH INTEGRAL FORMALISM
Or algebraic QFT
Or the star formalism thingy
Or Schrodinger wavefunctionals
 
star formalism?
wtf are wavefunctionals
 
You can define QFT states as wavefunctionals
 
you know doing some linear motion problems for linear algebra was kinda nice
a break from all this bullshit...
 
2:37 AM
@0celo7 You haven't seen thinking of QM as being given by the $C^*$-algebra of observables?
 
$\Psi[t, \phi(x)]$
 
@0celo7 I have a feeling we've been over this before
 
@ACuriousMind I've been thinking of it as heresy
@ACuriousMind yes, you defined it and said "dunno what it does"
 
ah, found it againb
 
Exactly :D
 
2:38 AM
The Moyal product
In mathematics, the Moyal product (also called the star product or Weyl-Groenewold product) is perhaps the best-known example of a phase-space star product. It is an associative, non-commutative product, ★, on the functions on ℝ2n, equipped with its Poisson bracket (with a generalization to symplectic manifolds, described below). == Historical comments == The Moyal product is named after José Enrique Moyal, but is also sometimes called the Weyl-Groenewold product as it was introduced by H. J. Groenewold in his 1946 doctoral dissertation, in a trenchant appreciation of the Weyl correspondence. Moyal...
The phase space formulation
 
I can't submit my homework
 
Ah, "deformation quantization"
 
what is this
 
I should make a SE thread to get all the QM formalisms really
There are so many
I can think of like 10 on the top of my head
 
That'd be too broad :P
 
2:40 AM
Does SE have like
A wiki
 
does SE have a "how do I submit my homework" section
figured it out
got a 100
at least the computer thinks I'm smart
oh no I have to face Mr. LATA tomorrow...I have read like 4 pages in Hatcher
the problem is that he will actually remember that convo
 
obe
Face him in what?
 
class...
 
There seems to be a cottage industry of quantum mechanics formalism, really
 
In a duel to the DEATH!
 
2:44 AM
he's a scrawny hipster...will be good practice for when the time comes to overthrow my master
I checked. His socks do match.
Also, as it turns out, Alicia Keys is not known for mismatched socks. @ACuriousMind, you're finally exonerated.
 
...why do you believe me when I say my socks don't match, but not when I say I'm not Alicia Keys?
That's a bit inconsistent
 
obe
You should be happy that the suspicion has been lifted.
 
One is a sinister deception and the other is so stupidly embarassing that no one would ever lie themselves into a position where they'd have to fabricate that. Only a truly shameless person could do that...only a truly shameless man. You're not AK; QED.
@obe And the fact that he is not is suspicious in itself...
@ACuriousMind Where does (1.61) come from?
Do you literally just apply the rotation matrix or something?
 
@0celo7 Yes, I believe so
 
So how easy is it to solve functional equations
 
2:55 AM
ezpz
 
Can I pretend most of the time that $\Psi[\phi(x)] \approx f(y)$
Just solve them as I would a regular differential equation
 
@ACuriousMind Uhh what is the # on the bottom of that page?
 
I have no idea
 
welp
@ACuriousMind to your knowledge, does there need to be anything there?
 
Not really, I think
 
3:06 AM
well I'm off
Have a good...morning?
I can't handle your sleep schedule
You know there's something wrong when people 6 hours behind you are going to bed before you :)
 
Yeah, the lack of structure in my days is not good for me :D
 
Are you at least playing PoE?
Or perhaps reading about...GR?
@ACuriousMind what is the word right before (1.68)?
 
A typo of Kreisfrequenz
 
Oh, angular freq.?
 
Exactly
 
3:14 AM
Entartet?
 
degenerate
 
Ahhh
Why is there only one polarization in the x direction?
Wait what
@ACuriousMind please explain that paragraph :/
 
Which paragraph?
 
The one right under the diagram
And why can't l be negative?
 
I'm not sure either
 
3:30 AM
So was there any new Duffield drama while I was gone
 
@0celo7 I request help
 
@FenderLesPaul with
Help the Germans and we will help you
@Slereah no
 
so I have this quantity $\int_{V} d^3x \sqrt{-\gamma} u^a \nabla_a K$ where $V$ is a bounded timelike hypersurface, $\gamma$ is the induced metric on it, and $u^a$ is a 4-velocity tangent to it; $K$ is some scalar quantity. This is in an arbitrary space-time. The boundary of $V$ is in fact two 2-spheres $S_f$ and $S_i$.
I can write that integral also as $\int_V d^3 x \sqrt{-\gamma} \frac{d}{d\tau}K$
do you see a way to turn this into a surface integral over $S_f - S_i$?
Btw, the picture is I have an initial 2-sphere $S_i$ and it evolves to a final 2-sphere $S_f$ and $V$ is the resulting timelike hypersurface
 
Ok I get the sitch
So you want to use the Gauss theorem or something?
 
idk if I can use that in this case, I tried
what I wanted to do was choose coordinates adapted to $V$ so that $d^3x = dt d\Omega$ with $dt \propto d\tau$ by the appropriate normalization
and then just do the $d\tau$ integral
 
3:41 AM
I've forgotten, is the induced spatial metric covaraiantly constant?
 
to get rid of the derivative and just have a $d\omega$ integral over the 2-sphere
but yeah that's the issue
 
Oh it's not spatial, ignore that word
 
it isn't, not under $\nabla_a$ anyways
so I don't know what to do with that $\sqrt{-\gamma}$
 
And in general it will depend on t, right?
 
3:44 AM
I got nothing, sorry. I need to sleep now
Bye
 
night
it's all good
 
obe
@FenderLesPaul what does the weight function do in the integral representation of inner product?
 
Is this a Riemann-Stieltjes integral?
otherwise I'm not sure what you mean by "weight function"
 
obe
$(\psi, \phi) = \int\psi^*(x)\phi(x)w(x)dx$
where w(x) is a weight function.
uh i got it.
 
4:56 AM
Hey, @0celo7
do you know what's the exact condition for the ADM formalism to apply
I usually see it listed as global hyperbolicity
But I have seen non-GH spacetimes where ADM is applied
 
5:37 AM
0
Q: How do I post diagrams in a question?

AneekHow do I post a free body diagram or any rough sketch in a question? Is there a code or something else?

 
 
4 hours later…
9:10 AM
@0celo7 At this point, most people don't even have their PhD's by their mid-20s :P
 
9:57 AM
could you alter the username, please?
 
 
3 hours later…
12:49 PM
@Danu awesome username...why is there no filter for common curse words?
@Slereah Hmm, I thought it was GH because you need a well-defined time coord, no?
 
1:49 PM
@ACuriousMind any revelations on Casimir force while sleeping?
 
@0celo7 I didn't really think about it.
 

« first day (1756 days earlier)      last day (3172 days later) »