« first day (2120 days earlier)      last day (2792 days later) » 
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 16:0016:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

John Rennie
John Rennie
4:01 PM
@DanielSank (a) my answer makes sense (b) when people write this is not homework they mean they haven't been set it as homework, but it would still qualify as homework-and-exercises as discussed in my answer.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Ok John, how about this:
> What is the matrix element <0|Q|1> for a transmon qubit?
Is that homework or an exercise?
No.
Should it be supported on this site?
No.
 
Secret
Secret
@DanielSank yes, much better, especially it narrows down to the specific concept and the range of answers the answerer should keep in mind of
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Should it be rejected for the same reason as a homework problem?
Yes.
@Secret See what magic a little edit can do?
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
@DanielSank I don't understand the question so I can't comment.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@JohnRennie Replace it with
> What is the cross section for an electron scattering from a deuterium nucleus?
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
4:05 PM
That's a homework question.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Suppose I come to that question in the course of my research career at Google.
No, it's not.
I'm not doing homework. I'm doing research and I need to know this information.
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
Yes it is. If you do a course on scattering theory that's exactly the sort of problem you're going to be set as coursework.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@JohnRennie Oh my god.
Ok fine
What fields can I use for examples that you know stuff about?
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
Unless you're asking about experimental data ...
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
It's hard for me to pick an example that you won't refute as "I don't know that topic" but which is also a research question that I think should not be supported by our site.
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
4:07 PM
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@JohnRennie But now you're advocating a criterion for on- or off-topicness that presupposes some notion of "standard coursework". From my experience from this chat alone, what is thought to be a reasonable exercise during a "standard course" varies a lot
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
In general I wouldn't close any research question. I might not choose to answer it, but I wouldn't close it.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
> What is the hyperfine splitting for an electron orbiting a deuterium nucleus, taking into account all terms in the standard model?
 
David Z
David Z
@JohnRennie I think it covers a part of what is now excluded by our current homework policy. Perhaps it could have been an alternate way of writing part of that policy, back in ye olde days when we made it. If it's meant to contribute anything toward the new policy, I'm afraid I don't see the connection.
 
John Duffield
John Duffield
@DanielSank : IMHO your revision is way too much. You should not rewrite questions like this.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
4:09 PM
@JohnDuffield Noted.
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
18
Q: Graduate and above level questions aren't homework

John RennieI know, I know, it's yet another Meta post about our homework policy. Feel free to downvote and write abusive comments if you're heartily sick of posts about the homework policy. If you're still with me: the homework classification for closing questions has never literally meant that your teache...

discussion scope homework
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@JohnRennie Yeah, I think that's completely wrong.
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
18 upvotes - it's not just me.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
-1
25
Q: Should we rename the homework policy?

DanielSankThe homework policy is a constant source of confusion for new (and sometimes established) users. We see this confusion, for example, when users respond to closures based on the homework policy by defending their post with "This is not a homework problem", or similar. Some users have even been con...

discussion tags questions homework
+25 net score. It's not just me.
Your move.
 
Secret
Secret
@DanielSank I will respond: please isolate the specific aspect in that computation that you have trouble with cause we are not employed to do all the computation for you from step one
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
4:11 PM
@Secret Yes, see @JohnRennie? That question, although it's clearly graduate level, is inappropriate.
@JohnRennie Actually, now you're contradicting yourself.
 
John Rennie
John Rennie
@DavidZ I was suggesting that as the policy. It hadn't occurred to me to worry about whether it was new or not.
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Scattering cross sections are graduate level, yet you say grad level is automatically not homework.
Explain.
 
Secret
Secret
For me, homework like (or in general problem solving questions) are ok as long it is not a blantant demand people to do all the reasoning and computation for you. For the subset of layman questions, ACM have set up a good example by referring him/her to relevant resources while at the same time explaining the gist that the answer seeks for the question
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@DanielSank I computed scattering cross sections in undergrad. ::ducks::
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@ACuriousMind Oh, do shut up :P
::Throws tomato::
 
David Z
David Z
4:14 PM
@JohnRennie Ah. Well... we are trying to strip the whole idea of homework or homework-like out of the policy entirely. So I don't think what you wrote represents the direction we want to go with this.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
::eats tomato::
 
Secret
Secret
but then, trying to put layman questions into the consideration of homewowkr policy will introduce loopholes because any sufficeintly wittty user can impose him/her as layman
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@ACuriousMind ::throws mozzarella::
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
Damn you, couldn't you have thrown that before I ate the tomato!
::grudgingly eats mozzarella::
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
::throws basil::
(The whole plant, still in a clay pot)
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
4:17 PM
::gets hit in the face by a pot of basil::
Didn't expect that!
 
Secret
Secret
::Dodge, vase hit the ground, pick up the basil leaves, wash it under the sink and enjoy it like a rabbit::
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
^ I like this guy
@ACuriousMind Oh jeez, sorry!
 
0celo7
0celo7
What is going on here
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
Fun
@DanielSank It's okay, I heal fast
 
0celo7
0celo7
You found the field with one element?
 
Secret
Secret
4:28 PM
@ACuriousMind Is it possible to experimentally suppress a decay channel of a particle, say a hadron so that its decays slower? (similar to how in chemistry we can stablise reactive species by supplying energy, or use of solvent counterion etc.)?
 
0celo7
0celo7
Make it go really fast
ACM got like 1000 rep once for saying that
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Secret You can't really influence decay channels, since there's no "mechanism" - decay is probabilistic and "just occurs".
 
0celo7
0celo7
@BalarkaSen What I can probably show is that $$\sum_{i=1}^n|x^\alpha_i-x_i|^p<\epsilon$$
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 Yes, and it is glorious
 
Secret
Secret
hmm ok
 
0celo7
0celo7
4:31 PM
so that in the limit $n\to\infty$ we get $||x^\alpha-x||_p<\epsilon$.
Yes, I think that works!
type type type
@ACuriousMind You'd be proud of me
Yesterday I solved two eigenvalue problems and a quadratic equation.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
My pride knows no bounds
 
0celo7
0celo7
great!
 
Secret
Secret
> Since motion energy is positive, particle 2 must have mass energy less than or equal to the mass energy of particle 1. But the motion energy of particle 2 is positive, so if the
> mass energy of particle 2 is less than that of particle 1 that means particle 2 must be moving. But particle 1 started out at rest, so that means it had NO momentum. Particle 2 is
> moving, so it has SOME momentum. That’s impossible; momentum is conserved. Therefore the decay is impossible unless the two particles have equal mass. But in this case, if particle 1 could decay to particle 2, the reverse would also be true: particle 2 could decay to particle 1. Well, that’s not a decay at all; it is a mixing between the two types of particles, which is a qualitatively different phenomenon.
Well, we could have some kind of quantum version of an object exploding into two bits...?
(perhaps I am still thinking all of this too classically...)
anyway, moving on
> Since the photon is (as far as any experiment can tell) massless, there is nothing to which it can decay. That is why light waves can travel across a room, across space from the sun, and across the universe without disintegrating in flight. The same is presumably true for the graviton.
Meanwhile the gluon are stuck in the hadrons because of their color charge
> Decay rates become very slow when the children from a decay have masses that add up very close to that of the parent; that’s not surprising, since by rule 2 the decay rate has to decrease to zero once the children have more mass than the parent.

But the really odd thing is that if you put a neutron in certain atomic nuclei, it becomes stable! Helium, for instance, has two protons and two neutrons. Even though a neutron by itself lives a quarter of an hour, a helium nucleus will live for the age of the universe and longer. In fact this is true for the neutrons in the nuclei of all of t…
Hmm, let's see...
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
4:51 PM
So, uh, does anyone know the answer to this?
3
Q: Understanding "dex"

HuShuHi I am trying to understand the concept of dex and how to use it in calculations. The usual definition is that it is the order of magnitude, so $10^{0.1}$ is $0.1$ dex. I want to do a simple exercise of calculating the value of the RHS of Eqn 4 in this paper arxiv paper, the gammas are incompl...

supermassive-black-hole magnitude initial-mass-function
I really don't want my bounty to go to waste
 
Secret
Secret
> The punchline is this: the interaction energy among the protons and neutrons is negative, and of sufficient magnitude that in some nuclei, a neutron decaying would cause the energy of the system (the leftovers from the nucleus after the neutrons’ decay, and any other particles emitted in the decay) necessarily to increase, thus violating the principle of the conservation of energy. Since energy is conserved, that makes the decay impossible.
Ok later when I learn QFT, I can do a side project on it. If it is all about interaction energy, then perhaps there is a theoretical way to subject an unstable particle of interest into a condition simialr to neutrons in a nuclei thus "convining" it to not decay
it might be not so much about mechanism, but still a possible way for me to realise a dream of bagging a higgs boson and place it in my bedroom (fro god knows what reason)
That reminds me I need to add something to the AMA
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind Nope.
Not a threat.
Clearly meant to be one, but it was broken off.
 
Secret
Secret
My interest on particle physics are not as pure as my quantum interest: This is because one reason I learn particle physics is due to my scifi x collector of exotic stuff tendencies. That is particle physics is a means for me to learn the knoeledge so that I can bag those particles so I can store them at home
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 Things that are clearly meant to be threats are threats.
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind No
Without the full statement, nothing is certain.
 
Secret
Secret
4:59 PM
Having said that, the above discussion is actually stem from me reading an NMR article about characterising an unstable species
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
Nothing is ever "certain".
@Secret: Re "communication" - do you notice that you are writing a lot of things that are not responses to anyone, and that no one responds to?
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind Except for your unconditional love, right, mama duck?
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 My love is conditional, I'm afraid.
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
@0celo7 Careful with that. Are you fixing $n$ and increasing $\alpha$? Or fixing $\alpha$and increasing $n$?
 
0celo7
0celo7
wtf, what are the conditions
@BalarkaSen WORKING ON IT
I have a proof in my notes, transcribing it now
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
5:03 PM
Good luck
 
0celo7
0celo7
"proof"
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
In analysis a "proof" is often garbage.
 
0celo7
0celo7
I'm pretty sure this is correct
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
As in the 99% certain proof you had before.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 I'm afraid I'm unable to share my source code.
 
0celo7
0celo7
5:04 PM
stahp interrupting me
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
:P
OK, work on it. I am being a noise, sorry about that.
 
0celo7
0celo7
the real noise is my topology class in 20 minutes
I have to complete this proof before then!
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
says who
 
0celo7
0celo7
my sanity
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
How can a non-existent thing tell you anything? ;P
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
5:05 PM
didn't know you had any o' that left
 
Secret
Secret
ACM: Generally yes (I will fix that communication), but for the above case, I actually have some desire to share about my thoughts of how one can work towards bagging particles and seek for comments, but I am not really sure what comments I am looking for, nor based on the level the subject is, it does not seemed a sensible discussion. Thus it got stuck into something like that, sort of waiting for someone interested to leave behind a comment
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
jinx, @ACM
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind not nice
 
Secret
Secret
Perhaps that's might be one of the cause of the the diary, blog problem that 0celo7, Danu, you and others point out
 
0celo7
0celo7
I'm adding more lively commentary, too
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
5:07 PM
my proofs always contain a lot of lively commentary
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Secret But...a chat is not a place where you dump your thoughts and wait for someone to come along to be interested in them. A chat is a place where you (try to) talk to other people.
One might sometimes just drop some random thoughts into a chat, but it seems to me this is your primary mode of communication.
And this is why I often have a hard time understanding you: You're not talking to me, you're thinking at me.
I'm not saying this to be mean, but because you have repeatedly asked that we try and find where the problem lies.
 
Secret
Secret
sometimes I seek comments, but I don't know what comment or discussion I am looking for. That is one of the reason I don't even have an idea how to start a discussion for some topics. I think I should organise my thoughts a bit more and try to talk them out
@ACuriousMind I never aware it is that serious until now
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Secret Either I am overreacting, or people might be afraid to tell you because they don't want to offend you.
 
Secret
Secret
I am not worried about being offended as long it is the truth.
 
0celo7
0celo7
@BalarkaSen Done.
the key is termwise estimates, I think
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
5:14 PM
OK?
 
0celo7
0celo7
and you need Cauchyness
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Secret Well, most people easily get offended when one tells them they behave "wrong", no matter how true it is.
 
0celo7
0celo7
This prof doesn't care if proofs come out as $<2\epsilon$ or whatever, btw
I'm not writing a textbook solution
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 Oh how I hate the "magic $\epsilon/3$" pick at the beginning of a proof just because they want a clean $<\epsilon$ at the end.
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind Yes, he agrees
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
5:16 PM
I like this guy
 
0celo7
0celo7
In this case it'd be like $\epsilon/2^p$.
 
Balarka Sen
Balarka Sen
@ACuriousMind Me too.
 
0celo7
0celo7
er
something like that
maybe $2^{1/p}$
@ACuriousMind He hates algebra
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
I...can respect this guy
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind He likes me
@BalarkaSen I am confident in this proof
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
5:18 PM
Does he have feathers and is made of rubber?
 
0celo7
0celo7
I asked you to check the other one because I was unsure about that step
@ACuriousMind erm...no
 
Secret
Secret
On a more extreme note, I am known to some people as uncaring because of how I view the concern of social politeness as a burden to knowledge seeking and discussions. This seemed to cause an issue between me and some phD professors as they found that I can be too demanding sometimes
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind My real analysis prof took off points if you didn't do that.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@0celo7 ::gets out pitchfork::
 
0celo7
0celo7
I once had a limit come out as $<M\epsilon$ where $M$ was the bound of the function and I lost half the points for the problem
 
Secret
Secret
5:22 PM
I remember I used to get confused by epsilon delta proofs because of those magic pick of the form of the epsilons, and I am fine with the end of the proof came out as $< M\epsilon$ as long I knew it is indeed bounded
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Secret That sounds...unpleasant. Politeness may or may not be a burden to "knowledge seeking", but conservations with fellow humans are as much about social interaction as they are about the actual topic of conversation. You can't just say "forget politeness, we're talking about knowledge here". All communication is social.
 
Secret
Secret
Yeah, I still need to work on improving that...
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
This doesn't mean you should just conform to all social conventions, but you should be aware of the effects of breaking them, and consider that before deciding to ignore them.
@0celo7 I faintly remember you complaining about that here ;)
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
5:49 PM
Anyone here use Inkscape?
 
Secret
Secret
I have one installed in mac, I only have used it once so far
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@Secret Ok, well, I have an "advanced" problem :P
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:14 PM
@ACuriousMind Probably.
There's perhaps one controversial point left in my proof.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
So...is it true that the majority of SR doesn't involve calculus?
 
0celo7
0celo7
Namely that $\lim_\beta\sum^k|x^\alpha_n-x^\beta_n|^p=\sum^k|x^\alpha_n-x_n|^p$
nah
that's correct
@SirCumference Who told you that nonsense?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@0celo7 A graduate student
Who studied SR and QM
 
0celo7
0celo7
Clearly a physicist
No respectable geometer would say that
 
user218912
it's wrong anyway
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:22 PM
@obe holy fuck you're alive
 
user218912
xD
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@obe What, me or 0celo?
 
user218912
you
 
0celo7
0celo7
@SirCumference if by "SR" you mean "baby Lorentz transformations", sure.
But try computing the Lorentz factor along an asymmetric helicoid while spinning without calculus
or try doing anything with momentum, fluids, etc.
I wouldn't trust that grad student
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Er, if you say so
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:24 PM
I do say so.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Well, what more than calculus do I need to get started with QM?
I still can't understand the Schrödinger equations
Maybe I just need to study calc more
 
0celo7
0celo7
basic algebra and calculus
what classes are you taking
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Oh...really?
 
0celo7
0celo7
yes
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
I'm just planning on learning QM on my own time
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:26 PM
calc 3, diff eq, PDE, linear algebra
nothing more really
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Huh...
And GR?
 
0celo7
0celo7
depends what book
and depends if you're a physicist or not
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Well, what maths should I know before I look into even basic GR?
 
0celo7
0celo7
calculus on Banach spaces, multilinear algebra, point-set topology, algebraic topology, differential topology, Riemannian geometry, de Rham cohomology
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Oh jesus
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:28 PM
de Rham is not really important
probably skip that.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Sigh...and how long would I need to study GR if I wanted to be a physicist, or a cosmologist?
 
0celo7
0celo7
don't know
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Welp, I guess I'll keep learning calc and look into QM
Seems a hell of a lot easier
 
0celo7
0celo7
honestly, how have you not learned calculus yet?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
My high school's faculty is full of idiots
I'm hoping college will catch me up
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:31 PM
online resources?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Yeah, I took an AP Calc AB class online
But that was a year ago
 
0celo7
0celo7
ok, so teach yourself calc 2 and 3 and ode and pde
not that hard
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Are Pde and ode not part of calc 2-3?
 
0celo7
0celo7
no
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
D:
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:32 PM
@Sir
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
:31885178
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
@SirCumference I'm doing the same thing
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran What are ya majoring in?
 
0celo7
0celo7
>ya
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
I'm in highschool
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:33 PM
please please please use correct language
please
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@0celo7 lo siento
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
Hoping to major in Physics of some sort and Computer Science though.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran Oh, what are you going to major in then?
@Ulthran Cool. I just know HTML5 + JS pretty well
Also HQ9+ if you count that
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
@SirCumference I just spent the whole summer working with JS in an internship.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran How long have you known it?
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:36 PM
@SirCumference Just learned it this summer
@SirCumference I'm more of a Java and C guy
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran 3 years for me, but I really don't know any other language too well
Oh wait, I think it's about 4 years now
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
@SirCumference Cool. What kind of stuff have you done with it? Any money making or just for fun?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran Just for fun. Though I am working on a full-on game
 
0celo7
0celo7
There's your problem
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Where?
 
0celo7
0celo7
6:38 PM
Learn calculus, not programming
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
But programming is fun
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
But programming is so much more fun
:P
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Plus, to be an astrophysicist, you really oughta know Python
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
To be an anything you really ought to know Python
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
So I'll need to know how to program and I'll need to learn high level physics
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:40 PM
Unfortunately I haven't gotten around to learning it yet...
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran Me neither, haha
Still reminding myself to learn it eventually
I also wrote a HQ9+ interpreter
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
@SirCumference I don't think it is really that different from JS so it shouldn't be too much of a leap to go from one to the other
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@Ulthran Hopefully it isn't. I'm also looking into PHP and AngularJS
Right now I rely a lot on jQuery
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
PHP is fairly different from the rest. It has one focus and that's about all it's good for.
I tried AJAX and JSON a bit this summer but didn't really get into it that much.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
This summer I tried Java and C++, but I didn't get into them much either
But really, if ya don't know about HQ9+, read this
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:44 PM
Yeah... To learn those you really have to have a project you care enough about to finish which has to be done in one of those languages.
 
0celo7
0celo7
Calculus isn't fun but you need it for fun things
Analysis for really fun things
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@0celo7 Learning a program language isn't fun either, but it can be really helpful
 
0celo7
0celo7
Being a hooker can be helpful too, what's your point
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
@Ocelo7 ... Good point...
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Because if I'm a hooker, people can get me infected. If I'm a programmer, I can infect others.
I got the power now
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:48 PM
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
But really, programming helps ya be really creative
 
0celo7
0celo7
Make them wear a condom
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Plus it's becoming more essential in society
Haven't ya ever wanted to make a game in your life?
 
0celo7
0celo7
No
I'm not a nerd
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Well...uh...
 
Ulthran
Ulthran
6:50 PM
THen what are you doing on this site?
 
0celo7
0celo7
Bored in class right now
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Haven't you ever wanted to understand technical lingo?
 
0celo7
0celo7
Nope
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
But it could be useful
 
0celo7
0celo7
There are lots of possibly useful things I do not do.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
6:54 PM
Oye
Well, computers nowadays are already doing the calculations for us
 
0celo7
0celo7
When a computer can prove analysis theorems, let me know
You should be studying calculus
Stop wasting time here.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
But you said you were in class
Why are you on the chat?
@0celo7 Plus, it's not like humans will always be better at mathematics than computers
If a human can do it, then someone can program a computer to do it
 
0celo7
0celo7
@SirCumference not paying attention
@SirCumference lol
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@0celo7 Wat
 
0celo7
0celo7
Nothing
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
7:05 PM
That doesn't seem plausible?
 
0celo7
0celo7
Sure
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
8:04 PM
Look out, Physics.SE, the superconducting qubit people have discovered this site
2
Q: Purcell effect in the non-dispersive regime: atom in a cavity for moderate $\Delta$

user129412The system of interest is a two level system placed inside a cavity. This can be an atom and a three dimensional cavity, a superconducting qubit and a coplanar waveguide resonator, but the details do not matter. We will simply assume that we have a two level atom coupled to a cavity and write the...

quantum-information quantum-electrodynamics quantum-optics
Awwwww yissssss
 
vzn
vzn
8:17 PM
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
This guy is arguing with me on a site. He's claiming that Einstein was an idiot and that "Newtonian black holes" are at the center of each galaxy.
Also apparently GR is pseudoscience and Newtonian physics is absolute
 
0celo7
0celo7
I'm going to troll you unless you change your tune
(And you will fall for it)
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
My "tune"?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
9:11 PM
Astronomers have found an Earth-like planet orbiting the closest star to our Solar System, Proxima Centauri. This next-door planet is warm enough for liquid water, is almost certainly rocky and terrestrial, and could even have an atmosphere. It's named Proxima B.
 
0celo7
0celo7
9:30 PM
@SirCumference you shit on crackpots when in reality you cannot argue against them
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@0celo7 What ya mean?
 
0celo7
0celo7
@ACuriousMind YOU'RE ONE OF THEM
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Uh...any astronomers here?
 
alarge
alarge
@SirCumference Well, you can program solutions to many of the equations of physics, and then check if they make sense.
 
0celo7
0celo7
proof still wrong.
crap
I used convergence in my proof of convergence.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
9:38 PM
Goddammit!!!
I hate bounties, they're broken as hell
If you don't get an answer, you lose all that rep
 
0celo7
0celo7
lol
ask better questions obviously.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
It wasn't my question
 
0celo7
0celo7
bounty better questions obviously
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Sigh...
 
0celo7
0celo7
want to see a real calculus proof
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
9:41 PM
Too late now. SE doesn't let you take back bounties, for some bizarre reason
@0celo7 Er, not particularly?
 
0celo7
0celo7
fine.
I was going to teach you good mathematics
but you turn up your nose
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Well you brought up trolling me
And last time you supposedly taught me physics, you were trolling me
 
0celo7
0celo7
this is for real
My proof that $\ell^p$ is Banach
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
Yeah, that doesn't look like any mathematics I know
I think you're aware of that tho
 
Emilio Pisanty
Emilio Pisanty
@SirCumference Good catch
looks really cool
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
9:51 PM
I'm gonna lose my mind if my bounty goes to waste
I started the bounty in the first place because I didn't know the answer, and there's a badge for awarding a bounty
Strangely, there's no badge for simply starting the bounty. So if I don't get an answer, I'm out of luck
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
I have never been more dismayed by anything on this site than the comments here:
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@DanielSank Screenshot plz
Deleted
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Sending that user to Academics without even suggesting they come to our chat room is... unacceptable.
@SirCumference I'm not going to screenshot it, sorry.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@DanielSank Why not?
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Original question:'
> I'm a 17 year old student who's currently going to college and I'm intrigued by physics. Many great names in physics like Einstein, Newton, Galileo and Curie fascinate me with their work and amazing breakthroughs. I'm always of the mindset that the world is a vastly large playing field and there is so much to be discovered. I'm torn between pursuing a career in experimental or theoretical physicist and the likelihood of getting a job in either field.
> Though i am fascinated and filled with so much interest for both fields, I don't want to end up as another student who put their all into their dreams, only to end up at home and unemploed
Comment 1:
> This is a question for Academia.SE. We talk about physics here, not how to get jobs in physics.
Comment 2:
> I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it deals with employment prospects, rather than physics concepts.
Then the user deleted the question.
Please, when things like this happen, make the user feel welcome and suggest they come to the chat room.
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
9:54 PM
Oye
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Going to Academics.SE could give that person all kinds of ridiculous notions about academia being the only worthy path forward in physics.
 
Emilio Pisanty
Emilio Pisanty
@knzhou see the above
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
Not a single effort was made to steer that user to the chat, and worse the comments sent the user to what I would personally consider to be a very misleading source of information regarding the real world options for that user.
 
Emilio Pisanty
Emilio Pisanty
@DanielSank It's complicated by the fact that the OP can't actually come to the chat room
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
I know that statements of emotional state are not useful and often deleterious to constructive conversation, but I am rather upset that this happened.
@EmilioPisanty Yes, but not a single word about it.
No effort at all was made to help this person.
 
alarge
alarge
9:56 PM
@DanielSank Was it a new user, i.e. did they even have access to chat? Chat is anyway a minor feature of the platform, so the commentators might not even have used it themselves. It's not like there are that many people frequenting the chat that could answer the question. Better send them off to Physicsforums or Reddit etc.
 
Emilio Pisanty
Emilio Pisanty
@alarge brand new user
I agree that there wasn't a lot of compassion to go around
but it was just two interactions before the OP (unwittingly) made it impossible to contact them with further resources
over a 20-minute window
 
DanielSank
DanielSank
@alarge It was a new user, yes.
@alarge Yes but sending them to Academics?
 
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 16:0016:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

« first day (2120 days earlier)      last day (2792 days later) »