« first day (1585 days earlier)      last day (3359 days later) » 

2:00 AM
@StanShunpike Oh, sometimes. I could post an example from the chat history, but then I'd have to admit that I remember far too old random conversations in here far too exactly.
 
Lolol to be fair, 7 months isn't that long
Or however long uve been on here
 
@ACuriousMind Which article?
 
The Lorentz group, a Lie group on which special relativity is based, has a wide variety of representations. Many of these representations, both finite-dimensional and infinite-dimensional, are important in theoretical physics in the description of particles in relativistic quantum mechanics, as well as of both particles and quantum fields in quantum field theory. This representation theory also provides the theoretical ground for the concept of spin, which, for a particle, can be either integer or half-integer in the unit of the reduced Planck constant ℏ. Quantum mechanical wave functions r...
The table of contents alone tells you it's not gonna be a nice read :P
 
@ACuriousMind I think rep theory is one of those things where I'm happy to know the lingo, but the proofs take too much time and brain carbs.
My cat seems to be slimming down.
 
What is he/she on a diet?
 
2:06 AM
He's growing out of his fat baby stage :3
 
lol...castrated yet? They get fat after that, usually :P
 
He got castrated before we got him
He hit 1 a week or so ago
 
Then...perhaps there aren't enough mice around ;)
 
@ACuriousMind We tend to keep a clean house :P
 
2:08 AM
Haha...can't decide on a facial expression? :D
 
Got it right on the third try.
The first time I was typing faster than I was thinking, the second time I don't know what happened and the third time is correct.
For the first face my fingers didn't note the sarcasm.
1
Q: What is a magnetic field

DragonSlayer3What exactly is a magnetic field? I know what it does, but I want to know what it's made of, and how it operates.

Literally Google.
1
Q: Why does the non-linearity of the string action prohibit stretching due to strong excitations?

0celo7From 't Hooft's String Theory lecture notes (paraphrased): To understand hadronic particles as excited states of strings, we have to study the dynamical properties of these strings, and then quantize the theory. At first sight, this seems to be straightforward. We have a string with mass per ...

24 views
Holy. Crap.
I guarantee the magnetic field question gets more views in 3 hours.
 
@0celo7 Unfortunately, you are correct
 
@ACuriousMind I'd bounty it if I were more active.
 
@ACuriousMind I feel like that question doesn't show enough effort.
The magnetic field one
 
But I don't want to waste 50 points that go towards 3k.
 
2:15 AM
@StanShunpike Yeah. It doesn't. That's why I just downvoted it.
 
Like there are hundreds of videos let alone articles explaining it.
 
@0celo7 You just need to get some nice friends ;) I didn't even have to bounty my own open question :D
Yours not yet a week old yet, though
 
The string theory tag has 107 followers.
You'd think Heteroic, Jamal or one of them would at least leave a (helpful) comment.
 
@0celo7 Well, three people favourited it
 
@ACuriousMind I saw your answer at the question about electron waves. But, what you didn't see is that the O.P. says that what he wrote that the wave is actually probability, is not his words, is from his book. (If it is from book then it is the holy truth.)
 
2:18 AM
Nope
 
Fun fact: I saw my question had four favourites. It took me seven guesses to find all four people who starred it
@0celo7 ?
 
@0celo7 I read it and to my surprise understood it. Interesting +1
 
1 more person DV the b-field question & it won't appear on the main page
 
@ACuriousMind My schizophrenia acting up.
No I just thought for a second that "favourite" was the American way.
So I asked if I was retarded for calling it British.
But I am not retarded.
 
@Sofia So? His book is wrong, then. Or at least has a very non-standard view.
 
2:20 AM
@ACuriousMind You learned the evil, British way.
 
@0celo7 Evil Brits are the best Brits.
 
@ACuriousMind That's a tautology if I've ever seen one.
 
What is the policy on questions that are clearly odd topic, too broad, or not enough effort?
People aren't supposed to reply to them correct?
 
@StanShunpike I'm afraid odd-topic is not a close reason, though many wish it was ;)
 
Sorry off. Lol texting
I meant off topic
 
2:23 AM
@StanShunpike Not enough effort is not a close reason, and though I dislike people replying to them, there's nothing forbidding that
 
Really? I would think there would be a line tho
 
Also, even for closeable questions, replying to them is not forbidden
That's why more reviewers would be good, because that would close many questions faster before they can get bad answers.
 
@ACuriousMind he announced me that he will place the reference tomorrow. Prepare, at least in principle, for an endless arguing. I had once such a one, in this very site.
 
Is it frowned upon?
 
@ACuriousMind Post a 500 pt bounty and I'll gladly take it.
 
2:25 AM
@StanShunpike Well, I frown upon it, but the fact that answers often get votes indicate that not everybody does
 
Like replying to such questions. I got told off by some guy on MO for doing that.
So I haven't done it since.
 
@0celo7 Heh, after I make 20k, I will begin to post bounties more freely
@StanShunpike Well, as Shog once said - our mods and users are kittens compared to MO ;)
 
MO?
 
Why? What makes MO different?
 
Oh
Do they even let our kind in there?
lol
 
2:27 AM
That was the worst markup fail I ever had
 
I heard three dongs and thought I was popular.
 
@Sofia I will not argue with that user. Nor will I go out of my way to help them.
 
Is MO really that intense?
 
@ACuriousMind Which user?
 
@StanShunpike They are professional mathematicians. They are very nice when you can play on their level, but if you can't, they'll shred you into pieces
 
2:29 AM
@Sean i mean, a field medalist used it
Before he passed away
 
Crackpots don't survive there. MO is fiercely protective of the standard of their questions, and low-level questions are downvoted and closed without much fuzz
 
@ACuriousMind do you want to tell me that if he will protest, you will just ignore? I simply ask not criticize.
 
Why doesn't our site run that way?
 
@Sofia Yes, unless he points out an actual error in what I wrote, I couldn't care less if this particular user finds my answer helpful.
 
I mean, aren't most of the high rep users here professional physicists?
 
2:32 AM
Define "professional physicist"
 
@Sean But we are a site explicitly for all levels.
MO is not, the "children" can go play on math.SE
 
@ACuriousMind just a bit, stay with me: did you vote for close on the question on what is the magnetic field? Somebody recommended the Wikipedia. But the question is in fact, as usual, out of which material is built the magnetic field. This is the essence of the question. All the time returns the same question.
 
@Sofia No, I did not vote to close that.
 
@KyleKanos getting paid to do physics. Physics prof, researcher, etc. Dont you fall under that umbrella? I'd even count PhD students
 
@Sean Then there's a fair few at the top who aren't professional physicists
 
2:36 AM
@ACuriousMind Aaaa, probably dmckee. I am really jumping to bed now, so maybe we'll talk tomorrow.
 
@Sean The top four are not currently professional physicists, and two of them never really have been, I think
@Sofia If dmckee had voted to close, it would be closed already, since he is a moderator. Good night!
 
I voted to close it because it doesn't exactly make sense
"what is it made of?"
The other stuff is easily Google-able
"but I want to know what it's made of" - suppose you were told that the magnetic field is made of X. Would you not then ask, "well what exactly is X? What is X made of?". — Alfred Centauri 2 mins ago
 
Good point, I concur, it is closeable as unclear.
 
Lubos is number two on all time rep, and he has a Wikipedia page! Plus he got an acknowledgement in a Brian Greene book so I'm counting him
 
@ACuriousMind Is Ron Maimon a physicist?
 
2:39 AM
I guess a good number of users are probably physics students at some level
Lol at Ron Maimon. 0celo you may be opening a can of worms. Not sure though, he was before my time
 
@0celo7 I...am not sure, but he seems to have read almost every single paper and book ever written, so, FAPP, to use Bell's wonderful phrase, he probably is one.
 
@Sean Delicious worms.
 
@0celo7 Not by profession. I do not believe he has an advanced degree in physics
 
@0celo7 Said the fish before it bit the hook
 
@ACuriousMind , @KyleKanos No, no, please don't hurry. It's a legitimate question. If we don't know the answer it doesn't mean the question doesn't make sense. It is a clear question, but we don't know the answer. But indeed, it's better to talk tomorrow. Well, good night!
 
2:41 AM
At least that is what I recall reading in one of the many meta posts
@Sofia No, it's a bad question and I'm glad it got downvoted to oblivion.
 
If he was a professional, he definitely had some views not typical of professional physicists. Some of his answers suggested he believed in cold fusion
 
People always say he was a dick, but no one ever gives a specific example.
 
@0celo7 I think they've been cleaned up
 
@0celo7 Because the specific examples have been deleted
 
@ACuriousMind @KyleKanos Care to share war stories?
 
2:43 AM
I wasn't here for Ron.
But I wouldn't care to discuss whatever I saw anyways
 
@KyleKanos @ACuriousMind Was he before your time too?
 
@Sean It's not like there's any more evidence, for, say, string theory.
 
Nah, no stories to tell. What good has ever come of gossip?
 
If you're interested, he's left plenty of threads over on Meta.SE
 
I thought those had been mostly deleted too
 
2:44 AM
@Sean Yes, I came after the fall. ;)
 
@ACuriousMind Probably none.
 
@Sean Not unless it happened since I last saw a few months ago
 
All I really know is that he was a jerk, people didn't like it, he got suspended, some people didn't like that either, now he lives at physics overflow haha
 
@Sean Though there are hilarious squabbles over there, too.
 
Well he helped found PO, along with Dilaton & Dimension10--all former members
 
2:45 AM
At @0celo7 the difference is that string theory at least rests on a mathematical framework
 
@Sean Science is empiricism.
Empirically, they have equal validity.
 
I can't say that I want either credential or paycheck to rule when categorizing people as scientist or not. Ron gets to be a scientist, not be cause I say so or because I like him (I don't) or because he's right about everything (he's not), but because he is able to function as a scientist.
 
Ha! Not hardly
 
I think that's what that guy was saying earlier -- string theory is the death of science.
 
@0celo7 Don't let Lubos hear that ;)
 
2:47 AM
Sorry that was to @0celo7
 
@dmckee what do you mean?
 
@Sean From an empirical standpoint, cold fusion and string theory have equal validity.
i.e. none.
 
Scientists do science, regardless of degree & pay status
 
@KyleKanos That.
 
@dmckee but I wouldn't categorize myself as a scientist, even though I can read papers too. To me, a physicist is someone doing research. Which isn't to say that teaching is bad, because that's what I do. But there's a huge difference between what I do and what someone like lungs or Jim or whoever does
 
2:50 AM
@dmckee right, but what do you mean function as a scientist? Do you mean doing experiments, writing papers, teaching? What does it mean to function as a scientist.
 
@dmckee By physicist I meant tenure faculty or research physicist at some institution/company.
Ph.D. was implied as well.
 
@KyleKanos I won't argue with that. But at least with me, I teach science, I don't do science
 
@KyleKanos And yet, sometimes it seems everything that scientists do is claimed to be science, rather than that those who do science are scientists
 
@0celo7 SO you mean a pro. Fine. But I conceive of the term more broadly than that.
 
@dmckee My dad has a Master's in physics and no way I'd call him a physicist.
 
2:52 AM
@StanShunpike Ron doesn't publish in a traditional sense, but he does the thinking and he puts his views out there. If his ideas about cold fusion were to turn out to be true he would get a least a footnote in the histories. Which is as it should be.
 
Generally, unless you have a Ph.D. you are not an "ist" or "ician".
But that's my opinion.
 
Also @0celo7 is going to ruffle some feathers if he keeps pooping on string theory
 
@dmckee yeah to me that counts as well.
 
@Sean I have four string theory book open ATM.
 
::resists urge to make toilet paper joke::
 
2:54 AM
@Sean To paraphrase @ACuriousMind ~ "I have no idea how to get physics from this thing."
@ACuriousMind BBS has really glossy paper. Not good for sensitive skin down there.
 
@0celo7 That's too strong for my taste. I'd venture that a Ph.D. is a membership card because you've made a contribution to get the degree, but you don't have to get a degree to make the contribution.
It's the contribution that matters, I think.
 
@dmckee A contribution is hard to quantify.
 
@dmckee do you have a PhD?
 
@0celo7 People are hard to quantify.
 
But then, I'd have a hard time calling Dyson or Heaviside regular dudes.
 
2:56 AM
And not everyone wants to be placed in a box.
 
And yet, that's exactly what we do in awarding the sheepskin. And in truth those contributions vary. My was a really nice null measurement. I can say a lot and with certainty about where color transparency is not observed in the baryon system. ::sigh::
 
@ACuriousMind Your face
 
@Sean Yeah. And a tenure track job, none the less.
 
A null result is still a result
 
Of course, I've been known to describe that as "a triumph of persistent mediocrity".
 
2:57 AM
See, so wouldn't you be happy that I consider that professional physics?
 
I'm aware of a few people who wouldn't be considered professional physicists, under that category
 
@Sean Sure. Like I said, the degree or the job can put you in the set, but the lack shouldn't put you out of the set.
 
Oh people:
-4
A: Newton's Ring Experiment

steveni think it is appropriate to say that newton was misguided and actually was high on maal whilst undergoing this experiment thus should be renamed maaal's rings since it makes more logical sense.

 
Been there, flagged that.
 
Me too
 
3:00 AM
Mwahahahahahahahaha Moderator super powers for the win!
 
I clicked the link and the answer is gone already
 
@ACuriousMind So I wasn't following yesterday whether @bolbteppa 's approach to the $\frac{\partial}{\partial t}$ was the right one for explaining how it operates on the wave function
 
@Sean Uhm ... my fault, I'm afraid.
 
@Sean Well you can see the full text of it there
 
Darn it
 
3:01 AM
Just some childish trolling.
 
@StanShunpike Uhm...it's not wrong, but I don't like that approach to QM.
 
Newton was high on maal (whatever it is)
 
@ACuriousMind What approach do you like?
 
@StanShunpike Hilbert spaces! I didn't see a wavefunction until I was already a man.
@KyleKanos A cursory search indicates it is Hindu slang for weed.
 
I presumed it was some sort of inhalant drug. I'm sure it was popular in England in the 1700's too ;)
 
3:03 AM
@ACuriousMind How are metric path integrals defined? Do we integrate over string states which are black hole solutions?
 
@StanShunpike I gave you the most mainstream standard Copenhagen approach to quantum mechanics that Bohr and Landau took, literally everything is intuitive and follows from like 3 ideas
 
@ACuriousMind What?
 
@bolbteppa it was very cool! I'm just asking questions.
 
@0celo7 I learned of "the wavefunction" in a throwaway line from my lecturer: "Oh, by the way, $\langle x \lvert \psi \rangle$ is sometimes called the wavefunction"
 
@bolbteppa actually, that approach was perfect because I was trying to teach my sis a bit about QM and she gets derivatives but didn't understand the operator stuff. But that approach made sense
 
3:05 AM
Sure, basically the Hilbert space way is for people who like to pretend axioms are more fundamental than reality lol
 
@bolbteppa BURN
 
I get hysterical fits of laughter every time I think of how I thought that was how everyone thought of it.
 
@ACuriousMind You gonna take that?
 
^ dems fightin' words
 
@ACuriousMind We get it taught the normal, easy way.
 
3:06 AM
@ACuriousMind this is what I am not understanding. See to me, I still don't see why regular vector spaces are insufficient for describing the wave function. What does the Hilbert space offer us? I remember your comments about the Born rule, which is an inner product. Is that part of why we need Hilbert spaces?
 
All QM is good for is determining neutron cross sections anyway.
 
Yes, Hilbert spaces are for people who believe the clarity of axioms is preferable to the mud of intuitions
I'll let my SE spirit animal speak:
33
A: The Role of Rigor

Urs SchreiberRigor is clarity of concepts and precision of arguments. Therefore in the end there is no question that we want rigor. To get there we need freedom for speculation, first, but for good speculation we need... ...solid ground, which is the only ground that serves as a good jumping-off point fo...

 
spirit animal
 
Also: twitch.tv/rpglimitbreak -- tail end of the relay race of FF4 -> FF5 --> FF6
 
@KyleKanos You like speedruns?
 
3:08 AM
I do
But not all games
Mostly the RPGs and some MMX
 
@ACuriousMind That Urs guy is nuts.
 
@ACuriousMind who is Urs Schreiber and why is he your spirit animal?
 
His differential forms argument is actually an argument for more intuition and justifiable hand-waiving if you've read some MTW math.stackexchange.com/questions/596503/…
 
@ACuriousMind My spirit animal, Dimensio1n0: Rigour is certainly not clarity, etc. , but in fact the suffocation of clarity.
#rekt
Is this how engineers think?
 
@StanShunpike You need something that can interfere. Interference arises from adding phases $\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\phi}$. Phases are complex numbers, so the formalization of the idea of interference is something that can have a phase, i.e. can be multiplied by a complex number, and can be added. What is a thing that can be multiplied by a complex number and be added? A complex vector.
 
3:11 AM
@0celo7 you don't want Dimensio1n0 to be your spirit animal. He's one of the PO members now
 
@Sean I don't want anyone to be my spirit animal. That's just weird.
 
@ACuriousMind i still don't see why regular vector spaces are insufficient for describing the wave function. What does the Hilbert space offer us? I remember your comments about the Born rule, which is an inner product. Is that part of why we need Hilbert spaces?
@0celo7 a voice of reason. This whole convo is off topic lol
Ah sry @ACuriousMind
U were too quick for me
I didn't think u saw it
 
@StanShunpike i've been mocking @ACuriousMind and unleashing my inner engineer. I'm procrastinating the mess of group theory that is the string spectrum.
SO(25) Young tableaux.
 
@Sean Urs Schreiber is the creator of the nLab.
 
I don't even...
 
3:13 AM
@0celo7 lol
 
@StanShunpike I *think* this answers your question
"Mathematically, Heisenberg theory uses the space l2, while Schrodinger theory uses the space L2. A consequence of the Riesz-Fisher theorem is that the spaces l2 and L2 are isomorphic, a result proved in this book. The two theories leads to the same physical results, and in consequence are equivalent, although different in the mathematical content ! You need to buy this book ! "
http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Functions-Functional-Analysis-Mathematics/dp/0486406830/
 
@Sean Don't get @ACuriousMind started on category theory...
 
That is mental, I am not happy with baby young tableaux
 
Does anyone else miss the days of Amazon tax free? @bolbteppa thanks for the reference
 
3:17 AM
@StanShunpike Formally, you were always required to pay taxes. It was just changed that, instead of paying at Tax Season, you pay at the gate
 
I get the first two lines! :D
 
@0celo7 looks like string theory Tetris
 
Meaningless ;)
 
@KyleKanos I never though of it that way. True
 
The problem was that most people weren't actually paying at Tax Season
So Uncle Sam was missing out on money
 
3:19 AM
@ACuriousMind How the hell does this work? :/
 
@0celo7 Young tableaux? As far as I know they're magic whose working is guarantee by sacrificing a cat every full moon.
2
 
I know-ish Young tableaux.
I don't get the last column.
How does it relate to the other tetris column.
@ACuriousMind We've discussed them before.
 
I heard you had to sacrifice a rook (polynomial)
 
Yeah, I still am not really comfortable with them. I don't need them, and they don't need me.
We lead a happy relationship of not seeing each other
 
@ACuriousMind YOLO?
 
3:22 AM
@0celo7 ...?
 
YOLO = You Only Live Once
 
@ACuriousMind It's not worth learning for my purposes.
 
@KyleKanos I'm not that old ;) I just didn't see how it related to the discussion
 
@ACuriousMind Is there a German YOLO?
@ACuriousMind To me, YOLO means F it.
 
@0celo7 Nah, they also say YOLO here, although I've never really understood what it is supposed to mean.
 
3:25 AM
@ACuriousMind Do you understand what I mean in this context?
 
Well, F it I understand^^
 
Ha
@ACuriousMind Do you like the square root or do you put ^1/2 always?
 
@0celo7 I think I like the root.
 
@ACuriousMind is the acronym for YOLO different? Or Is the phrase " you only live once" just a single compound word in German? Haha
 
Du lebst nur einmal
DLNE?
 
3:28 AM
@Sean Haha, no, they literally say "Jolo", and write YOLO
@0celo7 Haha, I must try establishing that
 
@ACuriousMind Read it like a typical German acronym. Dilne?
 
Although Man lebt nur einmal would be the better translation
 
True.
Man is not in English, so it gets lost often.
 
Many stupid jokes about Mann/Frau/man get lost there. :D
 
Man should be in English. We would have less problems with passive or antecedents I think.
Possibly ignore that last statement.
I might be dumb.
It should be in English, though.
I wish we didn't have apostrophes in English.
No one knows how to use them, and they look strange on italicised stuff and punctuated acronyms.
 
3:32 AM
Interestingly, we can also use du in German like you use you in English, so it's not as if we really need man
 
I like YOLT
 
Twice?
 
James Bond reference
 
@StanShunpike You Only Live Tomato?
 
@ACuriousMind I recall man being much better than simply du in certain situations.
 
3:33 AM
@0celo7 Yes, because it avoids confusion :D
 
Sharknado?
 
@ACuriousMind Also, man does not forego the respect of Sie, I don't think.
 
I actually read the books. That book bond gets shot in the head, loses his memory, and is never found again.
That's how Fleming ended the series
 
TIL forgo = forego
Holy crap spoiler alert...
 
@0celo7 That's true
I don't like Sie, though.
 
3:35 AM
The movies are better ;)
 
@ACuriousMind In my dialect (Rheinland-Pfalz), Sie is easier to say that du, because of the -st on second person.
You could go full retard though and slur everything I guess.
German dialects are pretty awesome.
I somehow manage to get an "m" into haben Sie.
It's like hammse.
So hast du = hasche
@ACuriousMind How do I make it clear that the sh sound is short?
 
@0celo7 Uh...I dunno. I tend so say hasse or hasste and not hasche, though.
 
@ACuriousMind hasste is also acceptable. Where you from?
 
@0celo7 I don't have any particular dialect, I think (at least, everyone says I speak pretty clear Hochdeutsch), but I'm from Wuppertal originally.
 
@ACuriousMind I never liked Hochdeutsch, but if I were to speak conversationally now, I'd speak it because I don't remember fully how to say stuff in dialect.
 
3:47 AM
Well, some dialects are nice, some are awful
 
@ACuriousMind My mom's Bavarian is nasty.
 
@ACuriousMind is the time evolution operator related to the Schrödinger equation? @bolbteppa (I think it was) gave me a nice pdf explaining how to convert between all three pictures
But I still don't get how it relates to the SE itself
 
Reminds me of the fly creatures from Attack of the Clones for some reason.
 
I like Hungarian accents.
 
@StanShunpike Solve the SE to get the time evolution operator.
 
3:49 AM
@StanShunpike I think Wikipedia does a good job here.
Anyway, I'm gonna be off now. Good night/day!
 
@ACuriousMind It's 5am in Germany.
 
4:04 AM
@0celo7 what is the significance of the time evolution operator being a solution to the SE?
@DavidZ when you ask for opinions about whether something is off topic, are you usually just asking for people with high enough rep to close vote or asking for opinions in general?
 
4:30 AM
Does a stationary state necessarily imply that an eigenstate of some sort?
 
is anyone here
 
 
2 hours later…
6:23 AM
@StanShunpike I'm asking for close votes if you have enough rep, or flags if you don't. Or, of course, neither if you don't think it's off topic.
Posting it in chat also affords the opportunity to start a discussion about whether the question is off topic. Usually when I post these links, it's not totally clear that the question is off topic at all, and people might have different views on it.
 
 
3 hours later…
9:47 AM
@Sean Yes, possibly by an order of magnitude
 
 
1 hour later…
11:08 AM
@StanShunpike Usually, energy eigenstate
 
11:27 AM
If $x\in U$ and $U'\subset U$ is an open neighborhood of $x$, then $T_xU=T_xU'$, right?
 
 
1 hour later…
12:50 PM
@Danu why an energy one as opposed to anything else? Is this considered the eigenvalue of an observable?
 
@Danu. I didn't realize that. I thought support was more like 50/50 with maybe just a little bit more on the side of string theory
 
@Sean did you get my apology?
14 hours ago, by infinitesimal
I meant no offense @Sean
 
1:12 PM
@StanShunpike There is a natural correspondence between time-dependence and well-defined energy, as can be seen through the time-independent Schrödinger equations
@Sean Honestly, it may also be by two orders.
String theory is really huge
It has been one of the main fields of research in theory since the 80s
For instance, I think I've never been at a uni where nobody was working on ST. Usually, there is at least a full research group dedicated to it, and at my current university something like half of the theoretical research is in ST. On the flipside of things, I've never met anyone who works on LGQ and have never seen any course offered on it anywhere.
 
@infinitesimal I was never offended
 
@Danu Well then what do all the ST detractors subscribe to instead, if they're not necessarily working on LQG either?
 
1:35 PM
@infinitesimal , @Sean, @Danu, hi! Have a good day. Did you see Kyle Kanos around?
 
Thanks, you have a good day too @Sofia I haven't seen him around.
 
1:59 PM
@StanShunpike You get the time evolution operator from the SE by "solving" it.
@ACuriousMind Your ST lecture notes are essentially notes on Blumenhagen. They're a great help.
 
@Sean Most people don't work on quantum gravity
Most just think the popularity is hugely disproportional to the value, I guess.
@Sofia Hello. No use asking - you can just ping him and he'll respond when he gets there...
 
@Danu there's a course on loop quantum gravity offered at Penn State - though to be fair, that is one of the main research centers in the subject.
 
@Danu Do you have @ACuriousMind's ST lecture notes handy?
 
@0celo7 Yeah, why?
 
@Danu (3.127)
I've done FP path integrals before, but I don't remember the integral over the field being completely eliminated.
Oh, maybe we make a gauge transformation to a fixed metric and then the integral over metrics is converted to an integral over diffs and Weyls.
Yup that's it.
 
2:14 PM
Any chance I could get a copy of those notes, I have Blumenhagen planned for summer :)
 
@bolbteppa Perhaps @Danu can hook you up with the link. I don't have it anymore. Just ask @ACuriousMind when he comes back.
 
cool
 
I don't have it anymore either
 
@Danu What's up with the $\cong$ in (3.139)?
 
I'm not going to read/help you read that stuff right now, sorry
 
2:22 PM
That's fine.
 
@DavidZ That's my neck of the woods! Maybe that's why I thought LQG was a bigger deal than it is
 
2:54 PM
@DavidZ Right, fair enough. What's your impression on the number of people working in ST vs. LQG?
 
 
2 hours later…
4:54 PM
Does anyone have any idea why mathematicians prefer skew-symmetric over antisymmetric?
 
You mean the term?
Like why they prefer the label "skew-symmetric" instead of "anti-symmetric?"
 
Yeah
 
Maybe skew-symmetric is less confusing of terminology?
Maybe "anti-symmetric" does not necessarily reflect the fact that $a_{ij}=-a_{ji}$
IDK
 
5:09 PM
Maybe there's no good reason. It just seems strange that there should be a difference between the two cultures
 
@Danu a quick post at math chat dint give any fruitful outcome
 
@Gowtham I see they ignored you :P
 
@Danu i will console myself by thinking they dont know the answer to that question :)
 
@Gowtham Good idea ;)
 
5:27 PM
@Danu I guess I don't really know, but the number of papers on each subject published on arXiv each [time unit] is probably a reasonable indicator
If I had to guess I'd say they differ by a factor on the order of, and probably less than, 10, but that is just a guess
 
@DavidZ Mm yeah, okay There should be a way to easily find this number!
 
5:53 PM
I think the tail end of the question might confuse some people over at Seasoned Advice:
0
Q: Why does my chicken go dry when I boil it?

FasermalerThis may seem a silly question, but it has always stricken me as odd that chicken should dry out when I boil it in water. Intuitively it just seems weird, but thinking about this a bit while cooking just now, it also makes little sense to me from a basic physics point of view. I googled this firs...

I feel I have to apologize that my first question here isn't anything Higgs related or anything remotely that interesting
 
@Danu it has to do with characteristic 2 potentially failing, $f(x,y) = - f(y,x) \rightarrow f(x,x) + f(x,x) = 0 \rightarrow 2f(x,x) = 0$
 
@0celo7 Right I get that. But what I don't understand is the difference between the Schrodinger equation's purpose and what the time evolution operator does to a ket vector.
 

« first day (1585 days earlier)      last day (3359 days later) »