The h Bar

@Loong Thank you Loong :)

Danu

1:07 PM

Lame rename.

@Danu You're all bad-moody lately, what's up? :P

2

You're not regretting your subject major change are you?

The Most Efficient Way to Destroy the Universe – False Vacuum

1:26 PM

►

The problem is, we won't even know that it is coming, since it travels at the speed of light.

Even if it came from billions of light year away.

We just can't know beforehand.

The information that "it is coming" only travels at the speed of light.

1:53 PM

don't worry our universe expand way too quickly for it to sweep us out

2:04 PM

valid argument

though I'm not sure if your argument is implied by the expansion of the universe

I'm too ignorant on the real meaning of the expansion of the universe

hello

@Kenshin I am indeed a beginner, but depending on your problem I may be able to help.

@heather greetings

@Kaumudi.H I'm sorry, but they look like chex (the cereal) =)

@DHMO hello, how are you?

i'm fine

user228700

@heather I googled it and yep, they do! :-) Also, hi. We' had a long discussion about art this morning, if you're interested in that.

user228700

2:10 PM

@DHMO: Hello :-)

@Kaumudi.H I looked through it. I personally will sometimes enjoy looking at art museums, but I find abstract art meaningless and, as others have put it, something a child could do.

@Kaumudi.H hi

user228700

@heather I see.

On the other hand, my favorite pieces of art are those like Escher's, or fractals, or geometrically pleasing pieces.

But I do occasionally enjoy looking at pictures of the classics.

However, I have a weird taste compared to those in the art world =P

I don't really like the Mona Lisa

(it's good, I just don't rank it as high as others seem too)

but da Vinci's Last Supper probably ranks among my favorite classic paintings.

Van Gogh's art is kind of cool.

user228700

I'm not very experienced in the "Enjoying/appreciating art" field so I'd rather not comment on what I find meaningful and what I don't. However, I do believe that all art is inherently meaningful, even if I am unable to derive any meaning from it.

2:14 PM

@Kaumudi.H I don't believe that. (I'm not experienced in that realm either, I more just enjoy the subject, or how it was carried out, which is perhaps why I dislike abstract art.) Art, is, in my mind, what you make of it. There are plenty of paintings that have been made that are meaningful to someone that aren't in galleries, and (I believe) there are those in galleries because they are "ground-breaking" not because they are meaningful.

user228700

Hmm, I guess that depends on what you define to be "ground-breaking" art.

user228700

I should however, emphasize again, that I don't have much experience in this field and my opinions will certainly change.

perhaps I don't quite mean "groundbreaking" - I'm not sure quite how to put it. But I look at it as some paintings are there because of a "the emperor has no clothes" style situation - the artist wishes to make some money, the curator doesn't want to look stupid, it gets put into the gallery.

(and of course, I'm in middle school, I don't have barely any experience and my opinions are worth nothing, and will probably change anyway.)

user228700

Hmm. Oye, your opinions aren't worth nothing!

well, to someone in the field of art, they aren't =)

user228700

2:18 PM

:-| I...hmm, maybe.

here's one of my favorite pieces of art of all time:

escher's relativity

user228700

That's...very interesting. What is it that you like about it?

the way it tricks you.

So the bar added an art gallery

user228700

@DHMO 'Course. We all have many many things to talk about other than physics (:-P)

2:21 PM

start at the bottom, and you are going up the stairs quite normally, and then you are going side ways, and soon upside down, and you go in a different direction and you are on the reverse side of the staircase where you were.

it is...um, geometrically interesting.

user228700

Yes, it really is...

it makes you think, and get a pain in your neck from turning your head practically upside down =P

but then, on the other hand, I like things like Van Gogh's Starry Night.

user228700

@heather :-) Yeah...

user228700

@heather What dyou like about it?

so I have this weird mix of geometrically, math-y, pieces of art, and classic pieces of art that I like. but never, never abstract art.

user228700

2:24 PM

I see...

@Kaumudi.H well...it's simplistic in design, and it has broad brushstrokes, making it all look close to reality but not quite there yet...really, it makes me think of a dream not yet finished, but close to becoming reality.

i can't quite explain why I like it.

user228700

That's a nice way to put it :-)

for a similar sort of reason, i like a lot of impressionist art, like claude monet's impression sunrise.

the one thing though with that is it doesn't quite match up with my own picture.

user228700

@heather Ooh, I hadn't seen that one before.

(of what that morning sunrise should look like.)

@Kaumudi.H =D glad i could introduce you to a new one.

user228700

2:26 PM

:-) Thanks!

his water lilies one is also rather nice.

user228700

When I think "art", I think photos as well.

^i agree.

user228700

I read something somewhere that sort of changed the way I approach art.

do share =)

user228700

2:29 PM

5 hours ago, by Kaumudi. H

http://www.thebookoflife.org/appreciation/

user228700

Point 3.

user228700

@heather It's rather long but also a breath of fresh air.

okay, let me skim it then real quick

You girls have turned this room upside down.

I like it :-)

user228700

@Pissedofflayman Girls? All this art stuff started when Balarka asked me about...creating.

2:33 PM

I know...

[Division by zero] Yes, you can divide by zero. It is just VERY HARD. Let me illustrate why...

user228700

x'D There. Back to usual now--Secret's talking about division by zero again.

@Kaumudi.H hmm...it's most interesting.

I think...i think i agree.

hmm.

@Kaumudi.H lol

If you don't set the row of 2 or 3 exactly as shown, you get those two other not interesting cases covered by the no-go theorems

user228700

@heather U do..?

2:35 PM

@Kaumudi.H I think @Pissedofflayman may have been referencing in general, not just with art.

Yup

@Kaumudi.H yes, i think i do, in the sense that one of the purposes of art is that.

user228700

@heather Exactly.

which perhaps is why some nerds have less of an appreciation for art - they don't see the references (or don't care about the references) to that "glamour" mentioned.

but that's probably just me spouting nonsense =P

user228700

@heather What dyou mean?

2:37 PM

What physical meaning can you give division by 0 @Secret?

If you talk about something per degree Celsius you may get something...

@Kaumudi.H well, it sets up the point by saying that there's a certain glamour conveyed by images of celebrities today, a glamour that we don't have (and there always has been such a thing). art serves to bring us the beauty in the normal things in life that compared to glamour seem so normal. I'm saying that nerds may not see that glamour, or if they do may not find it all that appetizing, and so the purpose of art in that sense is lost.

@Pissedofflayman to be honest, I've always felt deep in my heart that anything divided by zero should equal infinity =P

So it's not a real number.

no idea. I have not explored the infintie case yet (which contain the rest of the associative cases), and also the nonassociative cases. But the zero inverse is something very different from all other types of multiplicative inverse. Mathematically speaking it will be some bijective map between the set of zero terms {0x} and your ordinary algebraic structures.

Zero terms behave somewhat like selective neutral elements in that you get things like 0x+0y=0xy, 0x+0y=0n. Thus they have this "assimilation" property.

@Kaumudi.H does that make any sense, or no?

user228700

@heather Hmm, while I am inclined to agree that nerds may not be appreciative of this elusive (not) glamour, I don't think that all nerds possess the inherent capability to appreciate even the mundane and completely normal aspects of life, which, according to the article I cited, is one of the purposes of art so I still think that when viewed this way, (certain types of) art is for everybody.

2:41 PM

seurat's pointilism impresses me not for the subject, but for the construction.

@Kaumudi.H no, of course you're right there, i simply meant that the purpose of art is reduced, because the need for that elevation of mundane things is removed to some extent by the lack of appreciation for that glamour. also, i should point out, the other thing is nerds already elevate!

for example, John Rennie is in love with computers.

that appreciation for an object most think of as just an object, is his own art.

an appreciation for the beauty of math, the perfectness of a theory in physics, all these things are a discipline's "art".

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

user228700

Yes, that is true. Nerds do have the capability to be unironically enthusiastic about objects and concepts :-)

it is only when one has a job they hate that the need to be reinvigorated for life again, perhaps through art.

and there i go spouting nonsense again =P

@Pissedofflayman yes =)

@heather On the other hand, maybe your notion of art is just too narrow. Are television series or comic books not art?

@ACuriousMind well...see my lower comment(s).

i revised my thought =)

2:46 PM

hello world! hello physics :D

user228700

@heather No, no, it's not nonsense. I just feel that we are, after all, only human. There will be many many moments in which we will need to be reminded that there is much to appreciate...even in the life of nerds.

Define: Art

@Kaumudi.H you are most probably, even definitely, right. but then i suppose a further question is whether art does the best job of doing that.

what about, for example, a belief in God?

user228700

@heather What about it..?

@heather Still I think your notion of art is too narrow. There is no one "purpose" of art. Some art is meant to make you think, some art is meant for you to simply enjoy looking at it/experiencing it, some art is meant to be frightening, some might not be meant to be anything at all.

2:48 PM

@Kaumudi.H looking around you and seeing that this is what God has made - that is surely beautiful and wonderful.

@ACuriousMind I don't disagree with you. I think i don't know enough to really talk about this =)

Can God create a rock that he cannot lift?

@Pissedofflayman maybe

user228700

@heather Sure, but what about the impossibility of it all? I don't need to believe in the existence of a God to know that all of this is so effing improbable. Hang on, lemme get something...

@Pissedofflayman why do we need to try to mess with God?

=P

You started it :P

2:50 PM

@Kaumudi.H that as well. I'm just pointing out an example of one thing that is invigorating (as opposed to art).

@Pissedofflayman did not =P I just mentioned God and then you started the mind games =P

@Pissedofflayman can god create another god?

user228700

@heather Right, of course.

@heather If you wait until you really can talk about stuff before talking about it, how are you ever going to learn? ;) Especially in a topic so far from objectivity as art :P

maybe @2physics

@ACuriousMind very true, which is why I didn't stop talking =P I'm merely making excuses for my ignorance.

user228700

2:52 PM

@heather I do that by saying "God, I'm so dumb" from time to time :-P

Well, you stopped talking about art and now the conversation seems to be in some vague sense about some god but I'm really not following it :P

@Pissedofflayman yup precise answer :D:D

user228700

Alrighty, gots to sleep. Bye :-)

cya

@heather are you familiar with beautifulsoup in python?

2:54 PM

@Kaumudi.H can god prevent you from going to sleep now?

user228700

@2physics If I were to answer that, I'd have to do it by asking you several different questions so let it be :-)

Answer: maybe

:D

user228700

@Pissedofflayman Answer: I am not interested to discuss about the consequences of having a God because at the moment, I'm not sure if I believe in the existence of such a being so there.

user228700

@heather: Ciao :-)

@Kaumudi.H titans game

lol

@Pissedofflayman you know the rules :D :D maybe :D

2:56 PM

@Kaumudi.H do have a good day

excuse me, night

@Kenshin vaguely. what exactly is the problem?

@heather who's night?

@2physics Kaumudi's?

who is

I meant :D

alright

@heather, this is the code I'm running: leftplayer = soup.find_all('div',{"class":"player-left-name"})

God bless you all fellas

2:58 PM

where soup = BeautifulSoup(html,"html.parser")

@Pissedofflayman and you too, maybe

@Kenshin please use gist/github for the sake of indentation

@heather do you think you can help?

If so i can use github otherwise it will consuem too much time to create it without gain

it depends on the problem to be honest

brb

okay back

wb

2:59 PM

ok so these are the only lines of importance:

bye

but anyway, it doesn't take that long; just copy and paste your code in!

soup = BeautifulSoup(html,"html.parser")

leftplayer = soup.find_all('div',{"class":"player-left-name"})

that's it

okay...

now the result I'm getting for the variable left player

3:00 PM

hmm.

includes span tags

two span tags

each with a distinct class name

how can I then get say the first element

e.g. this is the output:

[<div class="player-left-name">
<a href="/en/players/denis-kudla/kb09/overview">
<span class="first-name">

Denis

</span>
<span class="last-name">

Kudla

</span>
</a>
</div>]

I want to now obtain just the text "Denis"

what is the output you want?

oh, okay

give me a moment

could you please provide your full code?

sorry I don't want to make the full code publically available

okay...

but I've provided all the relevant lines

3:03 PM

that's going to make it more difficult.

but okay, i'll keep looking.

Basically given a variable "leftplayer" has the above output

how can I obtain the word "Dennis"

using the BeautifulSoup library

right.

okay, do me a favor and try this - instead of just printing leftplayer, print "leftplayer.string"

(just the stuff in quotes)

ok hang on

that should remove all the html tags and stuff, and (hopefully) return just "Denis Kudla"

AttributeError: 'ResultSet' object has no attribute 'string'

3:08 PM

ergh, give me a moment

try "leftplayer.get_text()" in your print statement

AttributeError: 'ResultSet' object has no attribute 'get_text'

I'll create a github hang on

hmm, I'll keep looking

strange that really should have worked.

I just created a github

where do i paste the code

btw, if you have a github with just those two lines of code, that's not going to help...

"create new file"

^click that button

then name the file whatever.py and paste your code in the body.

I don' tsee create new file

3:16 PM

top right of the screen...

on the code tab

Huh, looks like the art discussion continued longer than I originally intended it to be.

@BalarkaSen, well, it died down, and then Kaumudi and I revived it =)

@heather gist.github.com/Actuary999/22f36b1f19a5e7fd705771fee19bc0f1

it runs in python 3.6

okay

one moment then

@heather So it seems.

3:21 PM

okay, got it somewhat set up

oh, nope, error, nvm

brb

@ACuriousMind I completely agree with this. Yet it's interesting how the very nature human being to find connection amongst the unrelated, and to find endless signs and portent forces us, perhaps subconsciously, to find meaning in the meaningless. I feel like this very nature binds together the various forms of art with the history of human being (individual and social). In the end maybe it means nothing at all, but we have to make sense out of it.

okay back

Comics can be great works of art. Tintin is a classic and has many political, social and humanitarian themes in it. Kids these days may like the gothic "Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth"

@DHMO Let me teach you ;-;

@BalarkaSen Tintin is fabulous!

3:30 PM

@SirCumference go ahead

@BalarkaSen "Finding meaning in the meaningless" is the defining part of the human condition in some philosophies like existentialism, so certainly that will reflect in art, yes. Ultimately, your interpretation that art is bound together by that struggle tells me more about you than about art, though :)

@Kenshin hmm, running your code gives the error

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "python", line 4, in <module>
urllib.error.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>

hmm not seeing that error

r u using python 3.6 or 2.7?

I'm using 3.6

@ACuriousMind Hah. Yes, I have been slowly getting to the deep end of this existentialist stuff.

@DHMO Right, so first misconception to clear up: the universe is not shaped like an expanding ball. It doesn't have a center.

3:31 PM

the only error I see is from using print(leftplayer.get_text()) but when I change to print(leftplayer) it works

@heather It's my favorite.

Rather, you can think of it like a flat grid, and its "expansion" just means that the distances between objects on the grid are getting larger. In essence, more space is being created between the objects. That's what we mean by expansion — that objects are moving away from each other, since more space is being created between them.

Here's an easy analogy: imagine you are walking your dog. Suddenly, the ground begins expanding between you. You and your dog will separated and continue receding away from each other.

@SirCumference that's cleared

That's essentially happening everywhere: space is expanding between everything, so we are drifting away from other galaxies. The Universe is infinite, and we can constantly drift apart from other objects because space is being created in between us. Here's a GIF I made that might help you get it:

You can see how the galaxies drift apart as the space between them increases. And this happens everywhere in the Universe.

@Kenshin 3.5.2

3:34 PM

@DHMO Make sense so far?

yes

Now this has some really cool effects. Firstly, remember how nothing can travel faster than light?

Well, Einstein never said that. He actually said "nothing can travel faster than light through space".

Space itself can expand however fast it wants. So if something is traveling with space (basically if something is getting farther from us due to the expansion of space), it can recede from us faster than $c$

@SirCumference yes $c$ is a local speed limit only

what's the difference between this and breaking the speed limit?

Sigh, *space can expand however fast, not travel

@DHMO The distance is that objects aren't actually moving in the same sense. They're staying still, but drifting away because more space is being created between them and other stuff

3:36 PM

@SirCumference Has this theory been proven ? I read about it but could not find mathematical evidence.

It's not like they're moving through space

@anonymous Which theory? Hubble's law?

@SirCumference "The Universe is infinite, and we can constantly drift apart from other objects because space is being created in between us."

I mean, what is the difference between the expected results of the two?

@anonymous What part of that?

@SirCumference The bold part.

3:38 PM

@anonymous Sigh, technically that's not necessarily true, but just work with me.

I need to get the point across that spacial expansion means something other than an expanding ball

@DHMO Well, it's the difference between an object moving through space and an object moving with space.

@SirCumference I mean it could even be the surface of an expanding ball. Your explanation is equally valid there. Anyway, you go on. I am listening.

@SirCumference I don't mean "what is the difference in the meaning"

@heather, I don't know why it works, but this seems to extract the first nad last names: gist.github.com/Actuary999/22f36b1f19a5e7fd705771fee19bc0f1

@anonymous Yeah, I know, in a positively curved space

Lemme just work with a flat/negatively curved universe for now

@SirCumference I am asking "how can we distinguish between the two"

3:40 PM

@DHMO Well yeah, their speeds is one factor that we can use to distinguish them

There's another one too: redshifting

Basically, the universe's expansion stretches photons, so their wavelengths actually increase

If a galaxy is drifting away from us due to the universe's expansion, it'll become redder and redder

@Kenshin yes.

@anonymous Of course we cannot really produce evidence for that statement because it would require us to observe more than the (finite) observable universe. It makes no difference to what we see if you assume the universe is infinite beyond that or not, but most models assume that the universe is infinite because it's usually an easier model and because finiteness would either imply a boundary or pose restrictions on the curvature, which we don't observe.

well, because of that error that keeps coming up for me, i'm not sure if i can help you. i don't know how to fix it, and unless you're okay with me bugging you with stuff to test, i won't be able to check if solutions will work.

@Kenshin

@ACuriousMind Well here's a naïve question: if we can measure the universe's curvature to be flat, can't we presume that we live in an open universe?

@SirCumference why is it not because of the speed of the photon decreasing?

3:43 PM

@DHMO The speed of a photon never decreases. It's always at $c$

Its energy and momentum can decrease, and that affects their wavelengths

Yes, I meant energy, sorry

Yep

@SirCumference No, because "open" by definition means a universe with negative curvature :P

@ACuriousMind Not flat?

Wait, now I'm confused

Doesn't open just refer to an infinite universe?

No. The curvature of the universe has three categories: flat (no curvature), open (negative curvature) and closed (positive curvature)

3:45 PM

Yes, I know

Oh, all right, I'm stupid

A closed universe is always finite, but the flat and open ones can be both finite and infinite in general

Oh, really? My prof said that the latter are necessarily infinite

@DHMO Right, so in GR, conservation laws like conservation of energy and momentum can't be applied to changing spacetimes like an expanding universe.

@SirCumference Why should that be true? A universe with negative curvature could very well be finite (at least logically) unless we have proven that the universe has no "edges".

@SirCumference They are if you make certain other assumptions, but in general there certainly exist flat and open spacetimes which are finite (i.e. compact). I think they might not be globally hyperbolic though and therefore be excluded

@anonymous well, an "edge" doesn't really exist in standard GR - spacetimes cannot have "edges" because the behaviour at those boundaries would be undefined.

@SirCumference ok

3:50 PM

The way to have finite spacetimes is to have something akin to a sphere, which has no boundary and yet is not infinite.

@DHMO So the photon can just keep losing energy/momentum, without it being conserved

@ACuriousMind Ugh, hold on

I thought the universe can only be shaped like the surface of a sphere in a positively curved universe?

I said "akin to" :P

Flat is euclidean, and negatively is hyperbolic

How could a flat universe loop back?

think of the torus

which admits a flat metric

@SirCumference In 2d, the torus can carry a flat metric. It's certainly finite and "loops back".

3:53 PM

@SirCumference ok

All right, that works

So how about in a negatively curved universe?

I think the n-torus in general can be flat, so no need for 2d, actually

2 holed torus admits a negatively curved metric

oh, you mean S^1 x ... x S^1

Welp, I've clearly been confused...

All right, thanks, then

Something like this allows all curvatures

3:55 PM

@SirCumference All these finite universes probably exhibit pathological things like closed timelike curves or other causality violations, so standard cosmology doesn't usually consider them.

@anonymous That's the "standard metric", realized from R^3.

@ACuriousMind Duly noted.

@BalarkaSen So GR works in R^3 or R^2 ?

Or both

I don't know how GR works or not. I am just saying that's the Riemannian metric induced from R^3, rather than the flat metric induced from realizing the torus as a quotient of R^2.

@BalarkaSen Now I'm curious what you first thought of when hearing "n-torus"

3:57 PM

n-holed torus :)

Ah

@DHMO Everything I said make sense so far?

I guess so