« first day (2799 days earlier)      last day (2124 days later) » 

12:00 AM
Another Slereah bomb coming right up: This time it's Sabine Hossefelder's new book
 
will release it later
Names are just class representative of the underlying same object
 
guess I'll head out :D
latahz
 
vzn
12:26 AM
@Secret huh? what about it? didnt see slereah say anything about it. just bought a copy of Hossenfelder from amazon, should be delivered soon, maybe even in this big opened box next to me :) :P
 
12:41 AM
I vaguely recall Slereah or 3 other people talked about Lubos and then talked about Hossenfelder
Jun 14 at 16:01, by Albas
@JohnRennie Hossenfelder's book
Anyway, Hossenfelder get on my nerve ever since I heard about your (and many other non trolls) ghost silencing by her in her blog
I am glad I don't have to experience this myself, otherwise I would have get the government to put her on constant monitoring or something
 
@Blue I would not, personally, categorize Excel in the Turing tarpit.
But I might use it as a boundary marker.
The point, though, is that excel can do a lot without requiring a huge level of sophistication from the users.
 
vzn: In my moral system, silencing a non troll is much worse than genocide, because of how an uncaring society is really where most of the human suffering is came from
 
Certainly it contributes to, rather than hiding and controling the complexity of big problems, but for a substantial domain it makes the easy problems easy.
 
this btw, also affect my political ideal of against government and media censorship
 
Not that I'm a huge fan of excel: I consistently recommend that anyone embarking on (or seriously considering doing so) a career in the physical science learn some real analysis environment instead of using excel for everything.
 
12:57 AM
The reason why silencing, ghosting, and more generally censorship of media is so bad is because often times, you can do nothing about it
You can still file a lawsuit or something in response to a murder. The aforementioned three acts are the ultimately get out of jail free card, because there exists no effective measure to control them
 
Something that knows about sophisticated fit functions. Something that routinely reports on the errors of fit parameters and tells you about correlation matrices. Something that produces figures you could submit to a journal for publication without embrassment.
 
We had to use excel for our freshman labs for least squares analysis. I remember it being rather miserable. Now the real question is what you think about the companies that request your resume in word format lol
 
Anyone who silence, are automatically god and nobody is able to harm a god
They have absolute freedom to do whatever they want and nobody will be powerful enough to stop them
 
And unfortunately, I feel like the majority of users don't have an idea what a fit/measurement error is
 
Most users will never understand fitting. But every physical scientist should know enough to appreciate the difference between what Excel does and what a real fitting package does.
 
 
2 hours later…
2:53 AM
Football's Coming Home @JohnRennie :-)
 
vzn
3:17 AM
@Secret lol internet is sometimes not a place to build ones self esteem. agreed, silently deleted comments a lot like ghosting! & they are even supportive! omg geez! thx for the empathy man :) yes there was an extended conversation about hossenfelder but dont think slereah said anything. shes all about dissing string theory & slereah doesnt seem to relate to it much but others do, and shes mostly rejected on here so far. ps also bought becker + "string theory for dummies" :P
@Secret so am implicitly in the nontroll category, thx for that. :) although whats the difference between a troll & nontroll? similar to the difference between black + white right? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)
 
The degree I hate silencing is I would rather have 10^10 holocausts than to see one silencing to happen. I am also willing to destroy the planet than to see one silencing to happen. It is the most coward and inefficient thing of human nature that nature ever encoded into us
 
vzn
@Secret lol (can still relate some) & youve never even been suspended in chat have you? D:
 
A troll will purposely annoy people for amusement, they are not genuinely asking question or answering question, but just to provoke
@vzn I have been suspended thrice. I knew what I am doing
 
vzn
@Secret ouch, was not aware of that. sorry to hear it. am a bit )( surprised.
 
In this entire world there are only two things that can agitate me: Unexplained silencing and its antithesis the trolls. I am still trying to look at ways to break physics so I can erase both from existence forever
 
vzn
3:28 AM
@Secret lol in less dramatic areas hows the phd going? what do you do for fun? having a good summer so far?
 
(Although to be honest data loss is also quite infuriating, lol). As for my PhD, we just had a big meeting which my cosupervisor provided some solution on solving a nagging convergence problem, thus it is slow but steady
We are super lucky that the problem that has been hindering us for 2 weeks is a research topic of my cosupervisor roughly 2 years ago, thus she knew exactly what it is and how to solve it
 
vzn
nice/ cool
 
otherwise, have been mingling with many political parties in Australian politics
as well going to art galleries
 
vzn
art huh? what kind do you like? like it lots too, collect some, like outdoor art festivals
 
I tend to like scifi impression artworks such as installations
and also abstract art that is not Picasso
 
vzn
3:36 AM
re scifi/ robots etc, like sculptures, have collected a few, have seen these 1sthand recently luv it, wanna buy it but its kinda pricey henrycesneros.com metalsouls.com
 
Those sculptures you linked are too figuratively obvious to me to like them
These's also a category of artworks which gives me a strong feeling of being immersed in an alien world, but those are rare
It makes you forget that you are human and that you are a physical entity
 
vzn
lol you said you liked scifi! this is also a fun site, have spent $100s on it over the yrs, esp like wild blacklight ones, luv surfing the site allposters.com massive inventory o_O
 
What are some heretical physics views that you folks hold? For example, I don't believe spatial incoherent fields are separate from temporally incoherent fields.
 
vzn
@Mikhail hi/ lol maybe you came to the right place, or maybe not. the question is not coherent to me :P
 
3:43 AM
I want a list of well thought out items to mess with some friends
 
vzn
@Secret yeah really enjoy the beach scenes/ surfing related ones, some are just extraordinary wave photos, awe-inspiring/ breathtaking
@Mikhail lol try this all painstakingly cooked up recently but it might be too well thought out for your taste/ situation, but it is certainly certifiably heretical (or maybe just "certifiable") :P vzn1.wordpress.com/2018/05/25/fluid-paradigm-shift-2018 vzn1.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/… vzn1.wordpress.com/category/physics
 
What is a spatially incoherent field?
 
Slide 3 for example
People confused the instrument with the field properties, kinda
@vzn reads more like a diary
 
vzn
@Mikhail lol (is that like a blog?) :P yeah have heard that. its full of hundreds of refs but yeah people somehow miss those :P
 
@vzn I'm sure you're well aware of the deficiencies :-)
I wonder if you can print screen those and send them to archiv
 
vzn
3:51 AM
@Mikhail fits in with the heretical quality dont you think? people relate to the emojis also (eg one "cohort" teenager zoomed in on those in his feedback a few nites ago)
 
Problem is that I like the Copenhagen interpretation
Also fuck states
 
vzn
@Mikhail then you are (already) ill suited to countenance heretical ideas.
 
What if I don't believe in photons, only classical E&M. Actually, that is pretty retarded because you can count photons.
 
vzn
@Mikhail and yet you like copenhagen interpretation? this is not heresy its more like contradictions.
 
That won't trigger people, because they've already heard it
 
3:54 AM
I think the distinction between the two depends on whether the incoherence is along the direction of propagation vs perpendicular to it
 
@Secret no
 
vzn
@Mikhail oh believe me its extremely triggering and the chat transcript copiously proves that (its free to search). and actually its really cutting edge heresy :P
 
🤔
might give it a try
I'll do my usual, Born approximation sucks thing, given that its an approximation its hard to say i'm wrong
Maybe something about reversibility, but what
 
if it is parallel,then you expect the incoherence to show itself due to the irregularity in the frequency of the wave resulting in the phase difference between two periods of the wave to differ
 
vzn
@Mikhail looking over the ref (interesting), yeah it seems like the idea theres a spectrum would not be controversial.
 
3:57 AM
if it is perpendicular, then the phase along the horizontal direction of the wave does not have a fixed correlation, result in less interference
 
You guys are confusing realizations with the underlying distribution, maybe
 
vzn
@Mikhail the ref itself supports the idea of various continuums (vs distinct categories)...
 
Literally, everything in that ref is wrong, its the Kool-Aid I feed undergrads
 
vzn
@Mikhail lol looks solid to me. "wrong"? — heresy? (oh, sounds as if you wrote it?)
 
I didn't but I've wrote similar stuff
 
vzn
4:02 AM
@Mikhail looks quite rigorous. cant find anything to criticize about it on superficial skim. (MIT OCW written by some of the top profs in the world although it has no direct attribution.)
 
For example, in slide 11/26 Iout (top equation), at its literal interpretation, you have a illumination (dot) in the center of your microscope field of view for any object (literally a dot multiplies your object, this doesn't happen).
Basically, the derivation only works if you set the object to be a delta function, and assume you're imaging with a point scanning con-focal microscope
The correct image formation model is bilinear and given by Hopkin's (so called TCC coefficients). Because its not easily diagonalized, its only used in semiconductor manufacturing as a forward model.
 
vzn
@Mikhail it seems to just be taken out of books, some old, some cited. standard known stuff.
 
Its the Kool-Aid we give to undergrads, its not actually true :-)
 
there's a slogan I like: "education is the art of telling smaller and smaller lies"
 
vzn
dont drink the purple koolaid™ (old california/ silicon valley/ dotcom expr)
 
4:07 AM
ANYWAYS, I need stuff that will trigger people
 
vzn
@Mikhail and why is that? (now coming to mind, coincidentally we were just discussing trolls, maybe thats more along the lines of what you could use...)
 
Maybe that vacuum fluctuations are the real luminiferous aether ?
 
vzn
@Mikhail lol (again coincidentally) we were discussing similar ideas in here recently wrt "dirac sea". my blog basically asserts that (or something very close) if you read it closely.
 
@SirCumference howdio
 
Or read it at all
 
vzn
4:10 AM
@Mikhail lol 2nd thoughts (already)? so maybe it doesnt even pass as heresy then? :P
 
4:25 AM
Maybe that Monte Carlo has underlying sparsity assumptions which betray the users lack of domain knowledge?
Also that Hartree–Fock is bullshit, but I can't come up with a convincing reason
 
5:13 AM
hartree fock does not take account of electron correlation, of course it is bullshit by itself
 
5:28 AM
@Eulb Hey :)
 
 
1 hour later…
6:55 AM
@ACuriousMind Hey you're a mod right?
Sigh that was a stupid question
Welp you mind helping me with a favor?
 
 
2 hours later…
8:40 AM
Guys, how can we determine to what something dissolve into? For example H2O dissolves into $H^+ + OH^-$. How do I know that, I just learn it, is there some logic to know to what something will dissolve into? For example why didn't the water dissolve into $2H^+ + O^-$?
For example $Ca(OH)2 -> Ca^{2+} + 2OH^-$.
 
Basically, you just have to memorize the simplest cases.
 
Why It's Ca2+ and not 2Ca+ for example?
 
As Cup Fever says, you just have to learn the various ions
 
Oh, ok, also is there some balancing? I mean, why it's Ca2+ and not just Ca+?
Maybe the positive ions must be equal the negative?
 
You actually get an equilibrium. A Ca(OH)2 solution contains Ca2+, Ca(OH)+ and Ca(OH)2 in various amounts.
 
8:47 AM
So anions must be equal cations?
 
The solution is overall neutral, so obviously the total negative charge has to equal the total positive charge.
 
Ok, got it :) Thanks.
Last thing. Why $2OH^-$ is written like this an not like $OH^{2-}$? Maybe just memorizing again?
 
yup
 
$Ca^{2+}$ is the same? Memorizing?
 
An oxygen atom has six electrons in its outer shell. It would like to have eight electrons, so it has a tendency to add two electrons to form O2-.
Hydrogen has a single electron, and it tends to lose this to form H+
If you combine O2- and H+ you get OH-
 
8:52 AM
Oh, ok, an you just have two of those OH-, that's why we write it 2OH- and not OH2-?
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany It's very important to learn the mechanisms behind those reactions. A good textbook should cover them. What you're looking for is self-ionization of water.
 
@NovaliumCompany Yes. OH2- would be a single OH ion with a 2- charge.
 
@JohnRennie Which is wrong?
 
While 2OH- is two OH ions with a 1- charge
 
Yep, ok.
@Blue I thought it was just memorizing?
 
8:54 AM
@NovaliumCompany An OH ion with a -2 charge wouldn't be stable. It would fall apart to form O2- and a neutral hydrogen atom.
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany No, you shouldn't memorize chemistry. At least not when you're still in the learning phase. In this way you'll soon lose interest and begin to hate chemistry.
 
Anonymous
Always ask "why" for every reaction
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
And this is a great site ^ ;)
 
Ok, why OH2- wouldn't be stable, how do we know that?
 
8:56 AM
Hmm ... well ... it's true there are general principles that act as a guide, but at the end of the day there are enough exceptions and special cases that a lot of memorisation is involved.
 
$OH^{2-} > O^{2-} + H$?
 
Anonymous
\require{\mhchem}\ce{H2O}
 
@NovaliumCompany the simple answer is that experiment tells us it isn't stable. The more complicated answer is that the OH- ion has all its bonding orbitals occupied by electrons so to add a second electron would mean putting it in an antibonding orbital.
 
Anonymous
Use this format for chemical reactions ^
 
Anonymous
$\require{\mhchem}\ce{H_2O} \to $
 
8:59 AM
$\require{\mhchem}\ce{H2O -> H+ + OH-}$
Oh, it works.
Thanks :)
 
Anonymous
@JohnRennie Yes, of course, memorization is an important part of chemistry, but what is harmful is having the idea that chemistry is not governed by logical reasoning and physics. For most of the exceptions, there is thermodynamic, kinetic or other stability (ex - MOT) arguments although it's not necessary for a school student to know them all
 
$\require{\mhchem}\ce{H2CO3 -> 2H+ + CO3^{2-}}$ (testing)
 
@Blue I did, in effect, a chemistry degree though I specialised in physical chemistry to get away from the millions of special cases I was having to memorise.
 
Btw is my reaction right? ^
 
Anonymous
Well, special cases are obviously there and are annoying. But yet most of them still have some reason or at least have people researching about them :P
 
Anonymous
9:06 AM
Physical chemistry is much more logical though, yes
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany Reaction conditions are very important. Aren't those being taught to you yet?
 
@NovaliumCompany yes, though again we actually get a mixture of ions. There is always some bicarbonate present as well as carbonate.
 
@Blue What is reaction conditions? (I maybe know it under another name)
 
Anonymous
I mean what is the solution medium, temperature, catalyst, etc. Just writing $\require{\mhchem}\ce{H2CO3 -> 2H+ + CO3^{2-}}$ doesn't make sense, because the reaction could very well also be $\require{\mhchem}\ce{H2CO3 -> H+ + HCO3^{-}}$
 
@Blue No, we just simply write a reaction, the teacher says, memorize it, after that write it on the test, get a grade and that's it...
 
Anonymous
9:10 AM
Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwww
 
Anonymous
:P
 
I know...
 
Anonymous
One of the reasons I used to perform terribly in chemistry upto grade 10
 
Anonymous
You know, the first chapter which should be taught to all students is reaction mechanism. That's the heart of chemistry. Check out the book by Peter Sykes if you're interested
 
Anonymous
And then chemical and ionic equilibrium followed by chemical kinetics
 
9:13 AM
Well, I downloaded some chemistry introduction books on my kindle, I'll give them a look.
 
Have fun pal :-)
 
@Blue Peter Sykes is a tad bit too difficult for beginners
 
Wait, when we say \require{\mhchem}\ce{H2O -> H+ + OH-} we actually say what happens when water dissolves into water..? wut?
 
Anonymous
@AvnishKabaj I can't disagree, but that is called real chemistry ;)
 
Anonymous
9:17 AM
Although, it's much easier to approach if you're learning under guidance
 
Sykes is organic chemistry isn't it?
I've met Peter Sykes :-)
 
Anonymous
@JohnRennie Yeah, but it also covers a fair amount of inorganic!
 
@JohnRennie whoaaaaa
@Blue I don't think so
 
Sid
@JohnRennie ..wow
 
He was a lecturer at Cambridge when I was there.
 
Anonymous
9:18 AM
Peter Sykes was at Cambridge :)
 
@NovaliumCompany when we write reactions they are generally a simplification. Ionisation in water is really complicated with many different species formed.
However the usual H2O -> H+ + OH- is a good approximation to what happens.
 
Doesn't that mean that water is salt? (I know it doesn't but why)
 
Anonymous
@AvnishKabaj Chapter 1,2 and 3 of the textbook are relevant to almost all of chemistry
 
Though the H+ binds to a neutral water molecule to form H3O+ rather than an isolated proton.
 
define what a "salt" is first @NovaliumCompany
 
9:22 AM
Well, when acid and base cancel out or something?
 
@NovaliumCompany water is a bit of a special case. It's a weak acid and a weak base, so in a sense it is a salt formed from a reaction of a weak acid and a weak base. However we wouldn't normally regard water as a salt.
 
Anonymous
Then, coming to the neucleophilic and electrophilic reactions....those also are relevant to a large portion of inorganic reactions. There's unnecessarily a large divide between organic and inorganic whereas a large part of the basic mechanisms overlap
 
For a start it is only very weakly dissociated. Only about one water molecule in 10 million molecules is dissociated at pH 7.
Compare that to sodium chloride, which is virtually 100% dissociated in aqueous solution.
 
@Blue I'm talking about a guide book to reaction mechanism
 
Anonymous
9:26 AM
@AvnishKabaj Me too. The first chapter is "structure, reactivity and mechanism"
 
Anonymous
The second chapter is on energy/kinetics
 
Anonymous
The third chapter is on strengths of acid/bases
 
Guys, we say something is classified as salt when it dissolves into water and equal numbers of H+ and OH- are formed? What would be a simple example of salt?
 
NaCl
 
not that type of salt :D
 
9:28 AM
oh, sorry
 
Anonymous
In chemistry, a salt is an ionic compound that can be formed by the neutralization reaction of an acid and a base. Salts are composed of related numbers of cations (positively charged ions) and anions (negative ions) so that the product is electrically neutral (without a net charge). These component ions can be inorganic, such as chloride (Cl−), or organic, such as acetate (CH3CO−2); and can be monatomic, such as fluoride (F−), or polyatomic, such as sulfate (SO2−4). == Kinds of salts == Salts can be classified in a variety of ways. Salts that produce hydroxide ions when dissolved in water are...
 
Oh, so we don't need any H+ or OH-?
We just need equal number of anions and cations?
So NaCl will be salt?
 
Anonymous
Some salts are acidic and some salts are basic too
 
Anonymous
Well, they of course need to be neutral compounds
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany Sure
 
Anonymous
9:30 AM
It's a neutral salt
 
What will be an example of acidic salt :D?
 
@NovaliumCompany sodium bicarbonate
Ferric chloride
(these two salts are acidic for different reasons)
 
FeCl3 doesn't contain H+ or OH-?
 
Anonymous
Yeah, you should learn the different concepts of acidity - Lewis, Arrhenius, etc
 
Why would it be acidic or basic?
 
9:32 AM
The Fe3+ ion reacts with water:
FE3+ + H2O -> Fe(OH)2+ + H+
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany See Lewis acids and bases
 
So when you add Fe3+ salts to water they produce some H+ ions and those H+ ions make the solution acidic
 
Ok, I'll continue after 30 mins. (lunch time)
 
Sid
9:51 AM
(Happy Independence Day to the Americans)
 
Anonymous
Ah, it's 4th of July
 
All day long apparently
 
Anonymous
@Sid I was wondering if it had any relation to the lyrics: "...After the storm, something was born on the fourth of July..."
 
flippin americans
 
Sid
@Blue maybe? I don't know much about music
 
9:58 AM
A Taylor Swift song????
--credibility
 
Anonymous
It was Ed Sheeran's verse
 
Blue is a certified normie
 
Anonymous
You can call me that :P
 
who certified him?
 
go read episode 3 season 2 of Reichenbach & Moriarty
exercise your IQ
 
10:00 AM
me?
 
Anonymous
Well, I do not want to be an anti-normie just for the sake of appearing cool to a particular group. Not that I particularly liked that song either. I was just wondering why he used that date in particular. It was so out of context there. :P
 
you really need to read Reichenbach & Moriarty's text for intellectuals, Blue
 
I don't know why he mentioned 4th July. I did a quick Google but found nothing useful.
 
your normie levels are getting dangerously high
 
Anonymous
I'm fine with a low IQ :P
 
Anonymous
10:05 AM
See Trump has a high IQ
 
Sid
@BalarkaSen what's that?
 
Anonymous
That can be dangerous
 
@Sid sigh
 
Aaaah. Apparently Ed Sheeran met his girlfriend at Taylor Swift's 4th July party.
 
John stop
nobody cares
 
Anonymous
10:06 AM
Okay, lol
 
@BalarkaSen kill me now
 
Anonymous
So nothing deep XD
 
life has descended to the point where it is beyond and meaning :-)
 
Sid
@Blue What dangerous? Employment in America is at an ALL-TIME HIGH. North Korea has buckled down UNDER TRUMP' S PRESSURE. They have him THE BEST DEAL EVER. SC agrees with Trump. WOW
 
I have degenerated to the point where I am Googling celebrity gossip
 
Sid
10:08 AM
@JohnRennie God have mercy on you. :P
 
Anonymous
@Sid And that is dangerous :P
 
Anonymous
If a country like North Korea can buckle down, think of what can happen to countries with more sane leaders
 
Sid
FAKE NEWS! HAters
 
^greatest propagada tool of the century
 
Anonymous
Oh, I've been listening to Alan Walker's songs for a couple of days, and some of them seem really good
 
Anonymous
10:13 AM
(arguably that's again normie but I don't care :P)
 
mean while more people have died in the US from drug overdoses in one year than the entire Vietnam war
 
Anonymous
@CupFever Ehhh, that's sort of expected
 
@Blue Remember you said that there can be acidic salts and basic salts. NaOH is an example of a basic salt isn't it? Since it contains equal number of anions and cations and also contains OH-?
 
Anonymous
@BalarkaSen As far as metal is concerned, I think this is still my favorite. You could suggest to me some of your favorites, as I'm not much into this genre
 
Anonymous
Fwiw, I hate rap, so anything other than that
 
10:23 AM
You're hopeless.
 
Tool
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany It isn't a salt
 
Disturbed's version of The Sound of Silence is (1) not metal (2) it's terrible
 
Anonymous
NaOH is a base
 
(the band I mean - not an insult :-)
 
10:24 AM
I thought everything that was with equal number of anions and cations (pH = 7) is salt?
 
Anonymous
@BalarkaSen At least I don't agree with (2)
 
Anonymous
I absolutely love the song
 
You're aware of the original Simon & Gurfunkel song I presume. In which case, hopeless.
 
Anonymous
Eh, this version is better than the original ;)
 
Anonymous
The original is a bit too "soft"
 
10:26 AM
I thought the Disturbed version was a bit power-ballad ish.
I was emotionaly scarred by the power-balled craze in the 80s
 
"power-balled" indeed
 
@Blue Nope. just look at China and US, tariff trade mess
China is becoming very dangerous now
 
Anonymous
@Secret That's true
 
But I do like many S&G songs. I think they were fantastic songwriters.
 
@Blue "Some salts are acidic and some salts are basic too" Why NaOH isn't a basic salt?
 
10:29 AM
@Blue If you want track recommendation, try this. If you want album recommendation, try this.
 
@NovaliumCompany we normally consider a salt to be the result of neutralisation of an acid or base.
 
The doomy and proggy stuff are the most accessible metal.
 
NaOH isn't made by neutralising an acid or a base.
 
NaCl isn't too but it's salt.
 
Anonymous
"YOB - Adrift in the Ocean" ewwww...that doesn't even sound like a song XD
 
10:31 AM
wait, how is NaCl made :D?
 
NaCl is made by neutralising the base NaOH with the acid HCl. That's why it is called a salt.
 
Anonymous
Dude, I think I'm hopeless indeed
 
Anonymous
It's just some murmuring going on in the background
 
I told you
You need to exercise your IQ with Reichenbach & Moriarty
 
@JohnRennie So NaOH + HCl -> NaCl + H2O? I think I got it, thanks.
 
10:32 AM
Yes
 
Anonymous
Can't tolerate this, sorry. I'm happy with the normie songs ;)
 
As a guideline: acid + base -> salt + water
 
Oh, so this is the universal formula for getting salt?
Is it possible to combine acid and base and not get salt?
 
10:35 AM
@NovaliumCompany terms in chemistry are often a bit vague, but generally speaking the reaction of an acid and base will always give you a salt plus water
 
Anonymous
@JohnRennie Hey, that's actually nice....a real song :D
 
@JohnRennie Ok. I really love that uncertainty in chemistry xD Thanks for the help.
 
@Blue The Manic Street Preachers are a sound bunch. They are one of the bands who write songs from the heart not for (purely) commercial reasons.
And they're a cracking good band to see live!
 
@JohnRennie Someone recommended Ne Obliviscaris to me yesterday. Their "Portal of I" album is pretty great.
 
Am I the only one who loves Queen here? :D
 
hmm... I don't have any positive or negative comments about the above 5 songs shared, they sound pretty fine to me
 
@BalarkaSen I'll cue it up but experience suggests there are very few good prog metal bands.
 
I don't disagree!
 
Anonymous
That was in the recommendations. Sounds really nice. Manic Street in my favorites list now :D
 
@NovaliumCompany Queen were absolutely fantastic :-)
 
Anonymous
10:40 AM
@NovaliumCompany Hearing now!
 
were :(
RIP Freddie.
 
@NovaliumCompany that's life
 
Anonymous
Lol half naked dance on stage
 
Anonymous
This is different
 
Queen is classic
 
10:42 AM
@Blue Wait until you see him wearing a cow spendex in another video :D
 
You can't characterize classic material as good or bad
 
why not?
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany Awesome ;)
 
Anonymous
This is real music
 
Anonymous
@NovaliumCompany Which one?
 
10:43 AM
@Blue Are you free for few minutes? I had to ask something related to calculus. (not a question, a concept)
 
Anonymous
Sure. Calculus while watching a nude dance is a good idea after all :P
2
 
Anonymous
Go ahead
 
@Blue Please visit PSS, or should I ask here?
 
Anonymous
You can ask here, Balarka is around too
 
Anonymous
10:45 AM
 
How did the third partial derivative term come there?
 
Anonymous
So you want to prove this?
 
What is the intuition behind it?
@Blue Yes, I am confident about the first two terms but have no clue about the last term
No I am not sure about the first 2 terms as well.
I have done the proof for $$\dfrac{d(\int_{a(x)}^{b(x)}f(t)dt)}{dx}$$
 
Anonymous
But there was only one parameter $t$ in that one.
 
Anonymous
1
Q: Prove Leibniz' rule using three properties

NeoI get stuck after using the first parameter, on how to expand it using the fundemental theorm of calculus and the chain rule. Here is the question: If $\varphi(t) = \int_{g(t)}^{h(t)}f(x,t)dx$, apply the fact that if $g(t) = \int_Af(x,t)dx$ then $g'(t) = \int_AD_2f(x,t)dx $, the fundamental th...

 
Anonymous
In calculus, Leibniz's rule for differentiation under the integral sign, named after Gottfried Leibniz, states that for an integral of the form ∫ a ( x ) b ( x ) f ( x , t ) d t , {\displaystyle \int _{a(x)}^{b(x)}f(x,t)\,dt,} where − ∞ < a ( x ...
 
Anonymous
See the alternative derivation ^
 
Anonymous
@Abcd Basically when the partial derivative w.r.t $x$ is $0$, the third term vanishes. But that is indeed the "general" formula
 

« first day (2799 days earlier)      last day (2124 days later) »