@CrazyBuddy it's true

@ManishEarth Yeah, I know that. Just that he stopped answering for a while and doesn't come to chat either made me think that he doesn't visit us often (@Sklivvz) :D

hey is it really unclear what the person is asking for in physics.stackexchange.com/questions/83329/… ? I thought he just wanted an intuitive explanation of the theorems. It seems like a reasonable question. There are other questions asking for intuitive explanations of things.

I am going to delete my snarky comment on the question.

I was just about to click the link... Grr...

@NowIGetToLearnWhatAHeadIs Yes, it is unclear. What about the theorems does the OP want explained? Why aren't the explanations on Wikipedia or in standard references sufficient? Those things need to be clarified in order for a question to be acceptable.

Any question which essentially asks "teach me about X" is not appropriate here. There are definitely places for that kind of information (e.g. Wikipedia), but we are not it.

@DavidZ to be fair, it is appropriate if the topic being addressed is not too broad and the user explains his current state

@ChrisWhite You've answered that and now, you want it to be migrated?

What about rep. score? :P

Rep. is conserved... Don't you worry. You'll get that in math :D

Trusted user??? And to make "voicey" comments like these... :P

Wait... you've got only 12k... I thought I saw it was at "15" o_O

(Oh, maybe josh)

Sometimes, I get confused by both of you guys' answers (the style is more or less the same)

though he's quite active :D

@ChrisWhite: Where are you in Facebook? I can't find you o_O (Is that your real name? :D)

We have an SE circle over there :D

(C'mon in and join us) ;-)

@ChrisWhite Nice..!!! So, that's what you've been doing? :D

Heh, brave enough :D

So, you're a fan of MS paint... Right? Phew... A companion :P

@ChrisWhite: I've read that 3 times... LOL :D

@ChrisWhite mine probably is more bumpy. Let's see

My math rep is weird as a result of multiple bounties

@ManishEarth Have some mercy..!!! I should read..!!! :D

eigen expansion? Okay, I know what it means, but seriously, why do they tack on "eigen" to everything? Eigenvector/eigenvalue/eigenfunction/ket/eigenspace is fine, but eigenexpansion? :o

GREMLINS!!!

@ManishEarth ?

?

oh

I think that's because the pressure of the surroundings cannot be changed by such a small system as the system itself.

So q=q_p

And we already know that all changes to the surroundings are rev

so q=q_rev

not sure

If $\Delta S = \frac{\Delta H}{T}$ then $\Delta G$ will be 0 always.

@ShuklaSannidhya so? that's only for surroundings

oh...

not sure though.

not in the mood to recall thermoD at the moment :P

Wait, you're 15, right? Why are you doing thermoD? Learning on your own? (if so, nice!)

So $\Delta S_{surr} = \frac{\Delta H_{surr}}{T}$ assumes that pressure of the surrounding remains constant?

@ShuklaSannidhya also that all processes are reversible from the POV of the surroundings.

which is almost always true

Not sure if the pressure bit is always true

@ManishEarth It is in my syllabus. So I have to. Not that I want to.

ThermoD in 9th grade syllabus? Which board?

@ManishEarth 8th? WTF? I am in 11th.

Oh ah

hmm

Clearly the math part of my brain broke down

Now that makes more sense

今日は

Hullo?

OK, so it doesn't work. :(

My Japanese imitation.

Yes! Mordarboard, baby!

@Sklivvz So? Puh.

sure, like 108 others :-) physics.stackexchange.com/help/badges/25/mortarboard

still, after three years it's been harder than expected

@DIMension10 regarding your latest TRF comment. I totally don't understand what your problem is with my answer. I didn't say anything about natural units. I flagged your comment as unconstructive because it was basically only repeating your answer... if you have something constructive to say about my answer then it's fine. If you simply disagree, downvote and move on.

I'm posting here so we don't clutter the comments section with minutiae

@DIMension10 also in referenced to this comment, I am certain that I have not downvoted any of your posts recently, and I think I have never downvoted anything you have written.

When i say "there are a few errors in your transcription" I do not mean that the formula with natural units is incorrect, but that it is not the same formula as in the video! The OP copied it wrong even though what he wrote is a valid formula. Clear now?

Funny story: folks email us all the time about being "serially downvoted". Invariably, they think they know who is responsible. Often as not, they're completely wrong and the votes are from multiple different users who've happened across their crappy posts and voted appropriately... But even when they're right and the votes are from a single person, they're almost always wrong in terms of who it was.

ITS MY ENEMY

right. Where "enemy" is usually "the poor sap who actually took the time to explain what was wrong with your post". And folks wonder why we don't make comments mandatory...

@Shog9 That's partially my motivation in mentioning that. I got a couple of downvotes on old answers in the last few days, and suspected maybe he was downvoting in retaliation for some slight. Then I found that comment. So maybe he thinks I'm downvoting him, and he is returning the favor. Otherwise, I wouldn't mention it.

I am doing HW

Two billiard balls of equal mass undergo a perfectly elastic head-on collision.

Woohoo for new laptop! Long overdue...