The h Bar

paracetamol

11:06 AM

@Slereah Yes, yes it is...

Sha Vuklia

guys, do any of you know where they explain what a parametrisation actually is? for instance here;

SBM

I'm curious to learn more.

Sha Vuklia

the do this parametrisation, but I don't understand for instance why they don't choose $z(x,y)\hat k$

SBM

More than our average Physics textbook at school.

paracetamol

Suspicious smell of Khan Academy

Sha Vuklia

11:08 AM

lol yea

paracetamol

Oh, Hi @blue o/

Bernardo Meurer

@ShaVuklia Manifold parametrisation?

Sha Vuklia

i have no idea what manifolds are, but basically, all i'm trying to understand is Stokes' theorem, so any parametrisation that would be necessary to understand that, is what i'm looking for

Bernardo Meurer

How did you get to Stokes without learning about manifolds first? O.o

Sha Vuklia

well technically i haven't learned stokes yet at uni, but i thought it should be doable for me

John Rennie

11:11 AM

@ShaVuklia: I'm probably missing something obvious, but I don't see where parameterisation is mentioned in the picture you posted.

Sha Vuklia

well in the $\vec r(x,y)$ part

that's what they call the parametrisation

it's a parametrisation of a surface, apparently

I would think that it basically gives you the position vector of the surface, but then they should have written $z(x,y)\hat k$

i'll just assume they made a mistake then

Jim

Good morning everybody (plus or minus time zone variations as appropriate)

Kenshin

Sup peeps

I'm back

John Rennie

@ShaVuklia Ah, OK.

Kenshin

How r u @JohnRennie

John Rennie

11:16 AM

@ShaVuklia They are just saying that for any patch of surface you can project it down onto the $xy$ plane.

Sha Vuklia

well, technically it's the other way around i think

Jim

I have a physics mystery for us to work out

Kenshin

Still distracted by the ladies I see

Sha Vuklia

so for any point on the $xy$ plane, you can get the actual surface patch

Kenshin

@Jim go ahead

I then have a philosophical mystery

John Rennie

11:17 AM

The point is that you can describe the surface by the $x$ and $y$ position and the height of the surface above the $xy$ plane, and that height can be written as a function of $x$ and $y$.

Jim

My aunt has these glass coffee tables in her living room. She was sitting in the adjacent room one day, tables fully in view, when one of the tables spontaneously exploded

no prior indication

Kenshin

R u sure

Jim

I have pictures I can upload

Kenshin

where you a witness?

what is the age of your aunt

'

Sha Vuklia

yes I see @John Rennie, but that is technically function $s$ that you're describing, which gives you the height. but i think I get it now

John Rennie

11:18 AM

@ShaVuklia: So the two parameters $x$ and $y$ are all that is needed to describe the surface. But that seems a rather trivial conclusion unless I'm missing something.

Kenshin

Can you please post the picture

it will assist me in my deduction

Sha Vuklia

no sure @John but do you agree that the unit vector $\hat k$ is missing?

Jim

Kenshin

So the table looked like the one in view?

Bernardo Meurer

@Jim That's why I don't trust glass

Jim

11:19 AM

yes but slightly smaller

Kenshin

like the smaller one on the right

yea

John Rennie

@ShaVuklia ah yes, that last term is missing the $\hat k$. Sorry, that should have been obvious to me as soon as you asked.

Sha Vuklia

cool! @john then it's all clear :) thx

Kenshin

how many pieces did it break into?

paracetamol

O_o

@Kenshin Try counting ;)

Sha Vuklia

11:20 AM

hey @paracetamol I had two of you this morning :P

2

Jim

notice, it didn't just shatter, it exploded with pieces projecting beyond the original bounds of the table

Kenshin

lol

Jim

@Kenshin more than we wanted to count

Kenshin

lol yeah just joking

paracetamol

@ShaVuklia Bows

Glad I could be of assistance.

Sha Vuklia

11:21 AM

haha!:)

Jim

how could this spontaneous explosion happen?

and should that be a question for the main site?

paracetamol

@Jim She put a jar of really hot coffee on it?

Jim

@paracetamol no interaction with the table for a reasonable period immediately before the explosion

Kenshin

@Jim could a temperature change cause the glass to contract and expand causing the shattering?

paracetamol

Hmm..

Jim

11:22 AM

@Kenshin that was my thoughts, it happened in the morning when the sun was on it, but the other tables were fine and this was under the larger one

paracetamol

Claps hands Aha!

Slereah

Haag gives as a reference a "private conversation" that happened 40 years ago

paracetamol

@Jim I know!

It was a sniper ಠ_ಠ

Jim

paracetamol

^ A really good sniper...

Jim

11:23 AM

@paracetamol with really bad aim?

and from the wrong direction

Kenshin

I think the sun cuased the shattering

I am 40% sure of it

paracetamol

@Jim To avoid raising suspicion ಠ_ಠ

Jim

that's the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't get that hot

@paracetamol naturally

paracetamol

@Jim How long has she the table for?

Kenshin

perhaps over time the repeated exposure to sunlight and airconditioning overtime weakend the table

Jim

11:25 AM

@paracetamol not sure on specifics. Between 4 and 8 years

paracetamol

Meh :(

Emilio Pisanty

@ShaVuklia Sure. Just keep in mind that conservation of momentum is much more fundamental than Newton's third law. The third law can break, but conservation of momentum doesn't.

Kenshin

Spontaneous glass breakage

Spontaneous glass breakage is a phenomenon by which toughened glass (or tempered) may spontaneously break without any apparent reason. The most common causes are: Minor damage during installation such as nicked or chipped edges later developing into larger breaks normally radiating from point of defect. Binding of the glass in the frame, causing stresses to develop as the glass expands and contracts due to thermal changes or deflects due to wind Internal defects within the glass such as nickel sulfide inclusions Thermal stresses in the glass Inadequate glass thickness to resist wind load ��2...

John Rennie

@paracetamol: do you still need an answer to that question about average speed?

paracetamol

@Jim Maybe it was just a hyperactive little nephew who didn't want to own up? ;)

Emilio Pisanty

11:27 AM

It's kind of like conservation of energy - it's true in mechanics but then you find that there are inelastic collisions, so you invent internal energy to make up for the difference, and then it turns out that it's much more fundamental.

paracetamol

@JohnRennie Sure!

(I thought you missed it)

Kenshin

where is @Kaumudi.H

Emilio Pisanty

Same with momentum - it's true from newtonian mechanics but then magnetic interactions break it, and then you can restore it by realizing that the electromagnetic field can have momentum as well.

Jim

@Kenshin so let's say the answer is somewhere in there. The follow up is why did it project outwards so far? How much stress was the whole thing under that it could do that?

John Rennie

@paracetamol I've been working this morning - something that i try to avoid but on this occasion I had no choice :-)

paracetamol

11:28 AM

@JohnRennie C'est la vie, mon ami ;)

Jim

@paracetamol As I said, she was in an adjacent room, but had full view of this happening

Kenshin

@Jim was a window open?

paracetamol

Oh...

John Rennie

@paracetamol: anyway, your moving object traces out some path in space as it moves. The length of this curve is the total distance moved. So far so good?

Jim

@Kenshin it was winter in Canada, There were no windows open in the whole city

paracetamol

11:29 AM

@JohnRennie Listens attentively

Kenshin

lol

paracetamol

Yeah

John Rennie

@paracetamol so the average speed is the length of this curve divided by the time taken.

Kenshin

@Jim I don't know but I think it's worth a try posting on the main site with your main question and the sub question (i.e. why projects so far?)

I'd upvote

paracetamol

@JohnRennie Plain sailing so far...continue...

Kenshin

11:30 AM

hello @heather

John Rennie

The average velocity is the vector from the starting point to the end point divided by the time taken.

paracetamol

^ Yeah!

John Rennie

And the magnitude of this vector is just the distance from the starting point to the end point divided by the time taken.

Jim

@Kenshin I'm not worried about upvotes (or upgoats), it's whether or not this is too opiniony. The true reason could be anything from a list. To me, that doesn't seem like a good question, but I'm curious about the public opinion on that

paracetamol

@JohnRennie 'Displacement', yep!

Wait @JohnR, is there a particular reason as to why you're avoiding using the term "displacement"?

Shing

11:33 AM

The professor I was asking for an opportunity for research assistant told me the biggest problem is visa (I am not local student)

Kenshin

@Jim I think it's not too opiniony

let's post and see

Shing

however,

Kenshin

if it is too opiniony people will soon let you know

but I think most will think it is an interesting question

John Rennie

@paracetamol The question asks how the magnitude of the average velocity can be equal to the average speed. The time taken is obviously the same, so they can be equal only if the displacement is equal to the curve length, and that can only be case if the curve is a straight line.

Shing

with a local undergrad degree, I would apply for a working visa with ease

Kenshin

11:33 AM

I think most would agree temperature was the cause

but the question is how does it create such a large project out

Shing

not sure he is refusing me or really telling me his difficulty

should I tell him about the visa thing?

hello @Shing

@Kenshin Hi~

nice dp

@JohnRennie "...so they can be equal only if the displacement is equal to the curve length, and that can only be case if the curve is a straight line." Yeah, that, or the particle/body doesn't move at all ._.

Shing

11:35 AM

@Kenshin ha ha thanks

John Rennie

@paracetamol If the particle doesn't move at all the displacement is still equal to the curve length since both are zero.

Kenshin

@Shing you should tell him about the visa thing

Why not?

paracetamol

@JohnRennie Exactly! So wouldn't both options 3 and 4 be an answer?

Kenshin

If he is trying to refuse you, then what loss is there in clarifying?

there is only potential gain in clarifying

Shing

@Kenshin you are right, I should clarify this to him.

thanks for the opinion

Kenshin

11:36 AM

np

John Rennie

@paracetamol option 3 says "The particle must be at rest" - emphasis mine.

That's obviously false since the statement can be true even if the particle is not at rest.

paracetamol

^ Option 4 uses "mine" too ._.

Which is why I doubt the question (and its supplied options) have been framed right :(

John Rennie

Arguably not moving is a special case of moving in a straight line and not turning back, though I agree it's poorly worded.

But options 1 to 3 are definitely incorrect so 4 is the only option left.

Kenshin

Is ethics/morality a real thing worth aiming for or just a means to an end of obtaining individual happiness?

paracetamol

@JohnRennie Agreed...

Thanks @JohnR o/

Sir Cumference

11:43 AM

Someone please explain why fire is so often associated with plasma

Kenshin

@paracetamol they don't accept opinionated questions there

@paracetamol I think it's more a history site

John Rennie

@SirCumference a flame isn't plasma

Sir Cumference

I tell people the Sun is plasma and they reply "so it is fire"

Kenshin

@paracetamol physicists are better at philosophy than philosophers

Sir Cumference

@JohnRennie I know

But the general public seems to think so for some reason

paracetamol

11:44 AM

@Kenshin I'm not sure if people here would find that insulting ;)

Kenshin

What's the difference between a flame and plasma and what are the similarities?

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin One is a chemical reaction, the other is a state of matter

John Rennie

@SirCumference ah, you were asking why people frequently think a flame is a plasma. I have no idea - one of those common scienvce myths.

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin I think ethics/morality does not help you maximize individual happiness. Most hedonists are against some or other form of conventional notion of ethics.

John Rennie

9

A: Confused about fire?

You should take some time to read the links zhermes suggests. As a starting point: Fire, or more accurately a flame, is a gas phase reaction. When you look at wood burning you are actually seeing wood heated by the flame giving off gas, and the flame is this gas reacting with oxygen. When a mol...

Kenshin

11:45 AM

@BalarkaSen so if happiness maximisation isn't the aim of ethics, what is the aim of ethics?

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin The only potential similarity is that a very hot flame can ionize gas, but that's only because fire is hot. Heating gas enough through any method could form plasma.

paracetamol

@SirCumference You often hear "The sun's a big hot ball of burning gas" ---> Fodder for the public :D

Sir Cumference

@paracetamol Oye, indeed.

Kenshin

ty @SirCumference

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin That's an interesting question. I personally think a common notion of ethics does stabilize human interactions.

Kenshin

11:47 AM

@BalarkaSen yeah that's a good way of putting it

Balarka Sen

There has been examples of total ethical breakdowns in society which made the society a total chaos.

Kenshin

ethics is more a practicallity of dealing with many individuals trying to satisfy their individual needs/desires

Balarka Sen

Yeah.

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin Bit cynical, no?

Kenshin

killing is only wrong per se, because if everyone tried to kill each other it would be mayham

Balarka Sen

11:48 AM

Da.

Kenshin

but if I am the king then it is not wrong for me to kill my subordinates

because allowing only the king to kill won't cause mayham

it is only maham if we allow the peasnts to kill each other right?

Ethics only matters for people of equal status and power who need to negotiate with each other

is this you rpoint @BalarkaSen

paracetamol

O_O

Sir Cumference

I honestly disagree. Normal people inherently value the lives of others. Usually when they are given too much power, they lose that sense of value.

Soldiers will give their lives protecting others, and doctors will spend their lives saving others

Kenshin

yes but are "normal" people acting "correctly"?

Balarka Sen

@SirCumference You're saying normal people have empathy? I think that's an unbased belief.

Kenshin

11:50 AM

jsut because they act this way, does that mean we all should act this way?

and does it mean it is "wrong" to not act this way?

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen It's not exclusive to people. Animals, some plants, and other species evolved to have empathy. Humans are no different.

Kenshin

and if we say they are acting out of "empathy", then aren't they just doing good because it makes them feel good? And thus their ethics is ultimately about maximising their own feelling of wellbeing?

Sir Cumference

A select few will lack empathy

Balarka Sen

@Sir I completely disagree with that, sorry :)

But it's a fine belief.

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen Guess we'll agree to disagree :)

Kenshin

11:53 AM

@SirCumference what about my point?

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin Exactly. You can see this is what happened in Red China: there was a dystopia when everyone killed everyone, took out their innards and ate them in the name of class struggle. This did not happen in Soviet Russia, where there was an totalitarian government, but not a dystopia!

Kenshin

yes your view makes the most sense @BalarkaSen

paracetamol

Darn...humans are complex ._.

Sir Cumference

Last time that happened, a father with a 2 year old daughter lost his life protecting complete strangers

Kenshin

@SirCumference why did he protect the strangers?

Because of an intellectual reason, or because of an emotional feeling?

paracetamol

11:56 AM

^ Maybe you should ask the guy in question ;)

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin If it were personal gain, he would surely want to spend the rest of his life with his family. To act that quickly is solely instinct.

Instinct and intuition often trump any motive

Balarka Sen

@Sir Is it biological instinct, or is it a notion of ethics? That's exactly the question.

Kenshin

^

because if it was instinct, then that doesn't automatically make it the ethically correct move

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen Well, considering many primates have empathy while other species often don't, I'd say empathy is an evolutionary trait

Kenshin

unless we believe ethics means to act in accordance with instinct

Balarka Sen

11:58 AM

Personal gain need not be limited to saving your own ass, either. Satisfying and saving ideologies and beliefs are also personal gain in the intellectual/emotional sense.

Sir Cumference

As is a natural want to listen to our consciences

Kenshin

@SirCumference and some have an instinct to kill

@SirCumference surely we must have a method of determining that killing is wrong, and protection is good? but instinct doesn't allow us to make that distinction

paracetamol

@BalarkaSen "Biological instinct", doubtful...when faced with an imminent threat, animals typically fend for themselves; they wouldn't give a flea about anyone else ._.

Balarka Sen

@SirCumference This is a dangerous assumption in my opinion.

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin The majority of people have the instinct to save, or at least the instinct never to kill, otherwise our society wouldn't function

Kenshin

12:00 PM

@SirCumference so the aim of ethics is to have a "functioning society"?

@SirCumference isn't that what Balarka said?

Balarka Sen

Yep. Ethics stabilizes society.

Kenshin

correct

Sir Cumference

Wait what

Balarka Sen

The opposite of "instinctively wanting to save" is not "instinctively wanting to kill".

Sir Cumference

Evolution is random, it doesn't have a goal

Kenshin

12:02 PM

I understand that

so your view is that killing isn't wrong, it's just evolutionary wired to be something considered bad, @SirCumference?

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen You're right. I misspoke, but I stand behind the reasoning that human instinct often prevents us from hurting others

@Kenshin Wait

Kenshin

@SirCumference so if a King wanted to kill people he considered insubordinates, if he has absolute power, there is no ethical reason for him not to do so

Sir Cumference

I'd say that it is, by definition, wrong

Since it is wired into our brain

Kenshin

@SirCumference but you can't say everyone has the same brain wirings. Every person is different

so "wrong' varies person to person?

for a serial killer killing might be "right"?

Balarka Sen

I honestly do not think there's a notion of evolutionary ethics wired to our brains.

Kenshin

12:04 PM

yep

Balarka Sen

Ethical notion varies culture-to-culture, society-to-society, civilization-to-civilization. You can see hundred thousand examples like that.

Kenshin

look at Gengas Kahn

and his soldiers

and thousands of other examples

people with power over others often exploit it without empathy

Sir Cumference

Disagree. If someone has no value for the lives of others, it is often because of how they're brains formed. Psychopathic sociopaths have been observed to have different brain structures, and a lack of certain hormones

The common brain will instinctively hesitate from hurting others, imo

Sha Vuklia

@Emilio oh, I thought the conservation of momentum was a theorem that followed from Newton's law, but apparently I have to consider it as a law on its own then i guess

Kenshin

@SirCumference suppose I temporarily concede that the common brain is like that

then we can ask why is it like that?

John Rennie

12:07 PM

@ShaVuklia conservation of momentum follows from translational symmetry and Noether's theorem.

Kenshin

just as the common brain likes to eat food for instance

this is because food aids in survival as we need energy

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin Evolution is random. Why don't pigs have wings?

Kenshin

evolution isn't random

it is biased towards traits that survive

we don't get "hungrY' when we haven't eaten because of randomness

Sha Vuklia

In Goldstein, it says "Conservation Theorem for the Linear Momentum of a Particle"; so I'm guessing for a particle it is correct to call it a conservation theorem? @John

Kenshin

it is because we survive if we have that instinct

Balarka Sen

12:08 PM

^ Darwinian selection picks out the traits which are favored by nature.

Sir Cumference

That's what natural selection does - those with certain evolutionary traits are more likely to survive

Balarka Sen

It's like a random walk, not random variable.

Kenshin

so we can potentially hypothesise that the people who had empathy had greater chance of survival

now this is likely because these people would get in less fights

Sir Cumference

There's no teleological reason for our empathy. But it helped our ancestors survive

Kenshin

have less conflict

less damage , more community support and more survival

now today, we have optimised meeting our desire for food compared to 1000 years ago

John Rennie

12:09 PM

@ShaVuklia I don't have Goldstein so I can't comment. I guess in introductory texts it isn't useful to appeal to Noether's theorem because it's too advanced, so you're forced to say momentum is conserved and leave it at that.

Kenshin

we have tastier food that is easier to produce

Balarka Sen

Ethics is not limited to "save other people", however. Even if you claim people have empathy towards fellow human lives due to evolutionary reasons, the notions of what's wrong or right might vary for sure.

Sha Vuklia

@John ok thx!

Kenshin

so that we can achieve the aim of hunger better

similarly

Sir Cumference

Well, evolution doesn't happen over the time span of thousands of years...

Usually tens or hundreds of thousands

Kenshin

12:10 PM

we know that empathy was hard wired to help us live more harmonius lives with each other

empathy was nature's attempt at "ethics"

but nature didn't get it perfect

Sha Vuklia

did nature get anything perfect, tho?

Kenshin

true ethics is living orderly with one another

no it didn't @ShaVuklia

that's why our brains help us advance upon nature

with better ways to eat, drink, sleep etc than what we would have had with nature alone

Balarka Sen

Yeah I can easily imagine a society which is degenerate and hedonist to the fullest extent, dystopian, but none of the people realizing they're harming or being harmed.

Kenshin

and we also have a more refined way of understanding ethics now

which is beyond simple "empathy"

but rather is the rules for a functioning society

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin Well, sure. But it still is an instinct of people to listen to their consciences, rather than a means of benefiting themselves

Balarka Sen

12:12 PM

@Kenshin Right.

Kenshin

@SirCumference yes empathy can help people follow the rules necessary for a functioning society

but right and wrong in my opinion aren't defined by empathy

but rather what is required for society to function well

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin I think it's both, but that's my opinion

Balarka Sen

Logical discussions aside, there has been so many examples of ethical breakdowns in the past millenia I really find any optimistic discussion hard to engage with.

Kenshin

People might feel their "empathy" ethics is right, because as you said, it is hardwired into their primitve brain structures, but this doesn't make it so

Balarka Sen

Personal failing though.

Sir Cumference

12:16 PM

@BalarkaSen Usually, that's what happens when people fear for their lives. Self preservation is also an instinct. But they will naturally feel shame and regret from hurting others.

Balarka Sen

@SirCumference I can give you examples where a chunk of the mass felt 0 regret for committing acts of murder, cannibalism and other horrific crimes.

Sir Cumference

Sometimes, as mentioned before, they value the lives of strangers more than their own

Kenshin

If ethics is about maintaing order in society, people will only follow ethics when there is tangible benefit to them (e.g. reaping the benefits of an ordered society). When their own lives are at risk, they no longer care about the benefits of ordered society and care about greater risks to themselves

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin I gave clear examples of the contrary earlier...

Kenshin

@SirCumference I consider acting in accordance with "empathy" to be a benefit though

it relieves some psychological strain to do so

if you feel pain when another is being harmed, by stepping in you are doing so to relieve your own pain

Balarka Sen

12:18 PM

Also, @SirCumference, "empathy" can easily be implemented as a self-beneficial philosophy.

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin Rational thought makes you consider whether something will benefit you. Instinct makes you merely do something, even without logical reason

Putting others before one's own future isn't in the realm of rationality, it's instinct

Balarka Sen

Really? Why doesn't evolutionary instinct hardwire you into always think of self-benefit in your actions?

I'd think that's the case.

Kenshin

@SirCumference it doesn't matter if it's instinct, it's still potentially to relieve their own psychological distress rather than to help the other person

and thus they are doing it for their own benefit

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen Well, it just doesn't. We survive by wanting to protect more than just our children

Kenshin

thus an ethics based on this, is an ethics based on achieving personal benefit

Sir Cumference

12:20 PM

Our aunts, uncles and even strangers are dear to us

Balarka Sen

@Sir Protecting fellow people is protecting fellow human beings. You are protecting the human race; that's self-beneficial in a sense.

I think you have a narrow notion of what self-benefit is.

Kenshin

@SirCumference can you not see that an ethics based upon empathy is an ethics based upon relieving one's own discomfort. For what is empathy if not personal discomfort when seeing another in pain?

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin I'm not going to argue semantics. If you think someone can rationally give up a future with his child for the life of another, merely for self relief, I don't know how to convince you

Slereah

Reading about QFT is

Kenshin

@SirCumference of course they didn't do it rationally, they did it emotionally

but that doesn't make my point any less valid

Balarka Sen

12:24 PM

I think @Sir values the deed more than the psychological reasons behind the deed, which can be entirely selfish - in the broadest sense of selfish - even though the deed may not be seen as such.

Which is fine, but :)

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin They didn't benefit themselves, that's not what's on someone's mind in that moment. They're only thinking that they need to help others, right at that moment.

Balarka Sen

@Sir How do you justify that belief of yours?

Kenshin

@SirCumference I understand that, but I ask why do they only go to help others instinctively? And my proposal is that they temporarily feel a very strong feeling of empathetic distress that they need to alleviate

Balarka Sen

Why isn't he thinking of satisfying his own psychological distress about helping someone else - hence helping himself in the end - instead of just instinctively helping someone else without thinking anything?

Sir Cumference

@Kenshin That's just as provable as my beliefs. If someone survives giving their lives to help others, they won't tell you they felt "a very strong feeling of empathetic distress that [they] needed to alleviate"

That's not how they were thinking, be it true or not

Balarka Sen

12:27 PM

How do you know man?

:P

Sir Cumference

@BalarkaSen Would you, in that situation?

Balarka Sen

I can certainly imagine myself helping someone else for entirely selfish reasons.

Kenshin

lol

Sir Cumference

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree then :)

Kenshin

@SirCumference I admin I would help too and I might not know why

Sir Cumference

12:29 PM

I gtg, later

Kenshin

@SirCumference but this doesn't help me ascertain what is morally "right" and "wrong"

because using empathy alone I dont' think is suitable

Balarka Sen

You should read Dostoyevsky's "Notes from The Underground"

Kenshin

laterz

k thanks @BalarkaSen I'll look into it

k good chat philosophellows

laterz

Balarka Sen

see ya

Sha Vuklia

@Balarka oh, I've read that one. not sure what I think of it, after 3 years :P

Balarka Sen

12:30 PM

@Sha It's my own personal textbook of existential philosophy.

like it a lot

Albert Einstein

Hello @yashas

Yashas

hy

Albert Einstein

@yashas, how are you?

Yashas

Not fine. How are you?

Albert Einstein

@yashas, I am good. What happened to you?

Yashas

12:33 PM

I used sqrt(1000) as 10 in my test

Sha Vuklia

that's cool @Balarka

Albert Einstein

@yashas. Oo. What test was it?

Yashas

CET :p

Albert Einstein

Means? For which level? And.for whar purpose?

Yashas

Some stupid state level exam

where the Q paper itself has several mistakes

Cannizzaro's reaction is an example of auto-oxidation. Which of the following option is correct:

(A) It is a typical reaction of aliphatic aldehyde.

(B) It is a reaction answered only by aromatic aldehydes.

(C) It is a reaction answered by all aldehydes.

(D) It is a reaction answered by only aldehydes containing a alpha hydrogen.

All options are wrong lol

Albert Einstein

12:40 PM

@yashas, It happens...

@yashas, what is the way to solve the problems related to faulty thermometer?

Yashas

@AlbertEinstein no idea

too subjective

Which of the following is the correct electron dot structure for N2O molecule?

Albert Einstein

@yashas, aren't there any formulas?

ACuriousMind

The solution to a faulty thermometer is obviously to buy a new thermometer.

Yashas

The options had two resonance structures of N2O -________-

Albert Einstein

@ACuriousMind,/?

ACuriousMind

12:43 PM

",/?"?

Slereah

12:57 PM

"The irreducible representations of $\bar {\mathfrak{P}}$ of class $(m_+,s)$ yield the quantum theory of a single particle with rest mass $m$ and spin $s$ alone in the world"

Very sad

user228700

Oh! @Ken was here :-) (@koolman)

Emilio Pisanty

@ShaVuklia It is a theorem that follows from Newton's third law, but it is also a much more fundamental statement on its own, i.e. it also holds in situations where Newton's third law doesn't.

Transcript for