@CuckooBeats How comes You were chatting at 4:30 AM ?

@CuckooBeats It is 4 and you can derive it, based on probability rules.

@CuckooBeats I came to it as the result of precious observation

@CuckooBeats I was chatting at 23:20 CET. Is it less expected than at 04:30 IST?

@CuckooBeats Impressive

wanders in

finds nothing interesting

@PetəíŕdtheWizard It is not about finding something interesting. It is about coming with something interesting.

@CuckooBeats In the meantime, you can finally solve the Stokes equations.

@Poutnik but if I come up with something interesting it'll be off-topic for here.

Then you are supposed to visit chats where it is on topic. :-)

@Poutnik I do already :) I just thought that this chat would be another one, but after the yesterday it became clear that it's not.

Do you see it as a bad thing?

@Poutnik No, it's just that this room isn't particularly interesting to me.

@PetəíŕdtheWizard I got it. You have not brought substantial chemical topics, IIRC. And it was and as intended to be mostly about a subset of chemistry.

@CuckooBeats Navier–Stokes equations

@PetəíŕdtheWizard So the question is, if staying in the room is for you any good. Nothing personal against you to get rid of you. It is on you to decide.

@CuckooBeats I am a 2-4 finger fast "hunt-and-peck" typer, as I had no typing lessons during my student phase and later did not make myself to learn it. I do not keep constant visual check while typing and then I have often this bad habit to send the text without check, optimistically thinking it was typed correctly. It is not like if I did not know to write better, it is just I do not know exactly what I am just sending.

@Poutnik I will stay in this room, because I think the occasional straying away can be interesting, sometimes. But if you think the room will be better without my avatar constantly lurking here, feel free to tell me. :)

hellooo