« first day (3001 days earlier)      last day (1929 days later) » 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

vzn
6:01 PM
sees emerging cyberspace zombie apocalypse o_O :P
 
cyberpocalypse
 
6:21 PM
@TerryBollinger sounds like.
 
I don't understand when we say for example on a velocity-time graph, we say what's the velocity at time t. But you can't have velocity nor acceleration at any exact time. At time 3 seconds for example, the time is paused, there is no velocity, the object isn't moving. I know what's the right way to think of this, but I just wanted to know what's wrong with this.
 
I was born not long after John defended his thesis
 
You are only moving for a specific time span, at an exact point in time, there is no movement, time is paused?
 
@JohnRennie any punched cards in your stash?
 
@NovaliumCompany We're not "pausing time" to say what the velocity is. We're just saying what its value is after exactly 3 seconds have elapsed
 
6:24 PM
@NovaliumCompany ... you're ignoring the existence of calculus?
 
@ACuriousMind Got it.
 
We have defined instantaneous velocity at a moment to be the value of the derivative at that moment.
@EmilioPisanty Acknowledging only the parts of math which are currently convenient for oneself is a long and proud tradition among physicists :P
 
@ACuriousMind That was so philosophically disgusting. I know calculus, I was just looking at things from a different prespective.
$I(t) = C\frac{dV}{dt}$ - What does this equation mean?
 
It's very useful to have a notion of an instantaneous velocity
 
$\frac{dV}{dt}$ how can this part be translated? The instantaneous voltage?
 
6:30 PM
@enumaris It's also useful to have a notion of time precise to the minute. Yet for the vast majority of human existence we've somehow managed without it.
@NovaliumCompany You should always mentally translate "dX/dt" to "rate of change of X" (unless t does not denote time, of course :P)
 
@NovaliumCompany generally "change in voltage per unit time"
 
Note that we call the rate of change of position the instantaneous velocity, not the instantaneous position, so you failed to analogize properly there
 
The rate of change of voltage is what, nothing? It doesn't have a name?
 
@ACuriousMind sure, we don't need to know physics to survive...we don't need many things to simply survive...
No set name that I can recall
 
@NovaliumCompany yeah, it doesn't have it's own name
 
6:33 PM
time to come up with your own!
get it while it's hot, and your name may be in history
dV/dt = the instantaneous Novalium
 
Sure, let's just give every rate of change its own name. I'm sure that won't lead to infinite regress or anything...
 
Wiat, so the rate of change of position dx/dt is equal to instantaneous velocity, but rate of change of voltage dV/dt is equal instantaneous voltage? Doesn't make sense?
 
It's not instantaneous voltage
It has no name
 
it's just dV/dt
 
6:34 PM
I thought of tghat
I proclaim! Rate of change of voltage will be instantaneous novalium!!!
plz give me a nobel prize for that.
 
Sounds good
 
Rate of change of capacitance will be instantaneous enumaris.
2 nobel prizes for now.
 
@enumaris Aye, it's been a long day, just hand the prize to this fella and we'll all be on our way.
 
sounds legit
 
@ACuriousMind Is that a polite way of saying, "just leave him to talk his stupidity out" :D?
 
6:37 PM
Is there a Swiss person here who can confirm?
 
@enumaris Swiss???
Nobel was not Swiss.
 
hmmm
why do I recall the Swiss giving out the Nobel lol
 
It's the Swedes.
You got the first two letters right :P
 
loool
Yeah Swede != Swiss but they are easily confused for each other
 
So in $I = C\frac{dV}{dt}$ what is I? Is it I(t), so we can get the current at any given time, only if there is change in voltage $\frac{dV}{dt}$ (instantaneous novalium)?
 
6:39 PM
Current I assume
 
@enumaris You're lucky that the Swiss are too neutral and the Swedes don't care enough to get you for that slander.
 
Yes, yes, I know it's current, but I mean, do we get it as a function I(t) or just the total current or something?
 
Why do you think those two concepts are mutually exclusive?
 
@NovaliumCompany The current is given as a function of time, $I(t)$. Note that that equation is special to a capacitor and not a general law
 
It's the "total current" at time t, so I(t)
 
6:41 PM
Got it.
Calculus finally starts to make some sense.
 
This is physics, not calculus :P
 
Any interesting equations featuring simple calculus?
@ACuriousMind Physics with calculus :)
Is IQ 130 enough to understand QM?
I assume calculus will be required, so I have a long road of learning...
I've always wanted a machine to produce copies of McDonald's burgers and I figured out that QM will be the key to making such machine.
Is QM really that mystic, and "wow" as people say?
Maybe it's the key to other dimensions.
 
I don't put much stock in IQ
 
^ agreed
 
I feel like it just tests you on how well you can do on an IQ test lol
 
6:45 PM
xD
So if I wanted to input values in $I = C\frac{dV}{dt}$, how will I do that?
Capacitance is ok, but what about the rate of change of voltage?
 
put in units of Volts/seconds
 
@enumaris Problem is, "how well you do on an IQ test" correlates significantly with your educational achievements, income, etc. That is, whatever IQ measures, it does measure something that correlates with other measures of success.
 
IQ tests are a sham
Read outliers
 
Ah.. I think I started a BIG discussion on IQs now...
 
@NovaliumCompany For some it is. For me it's always been just another framework for describing the world
 
6:48 PM
@ACuriousMind What do you plan to do with it? Why do you learn it?
 
It gets weird when you try to force it to fit into "intuitive" terms, or when you demand that it gives you an unambiguous ontology ("what is really going on")
@NovaliumCompany Nothing. I'll likely never use my knowledge of physics for any practical use.
 
@ACuriousMind Why not build a time machine, return to Einstein as a boy and kiss him?
 
Cool
That's the first time I've heard that
 
@NovaliumCompany Uhhhhh...I think you may be projecting here :D
 
I was thinking about killing baby Hitler at first but I replaced killing with kissing and Hitler with Einstein.
2
 
6:51 PM
Uno Reverse
 
question: in the geodesic equation for a photon I'm free to pick whatever affine parametrization I want, does the parametrization I pick determine the initial momentum of the photon? If yes, for what observer?
 
If I could go back in time, I'd go straight to people like von Neumann, Weyl, Wigner. What do I want with Einstein?
 
Just sit in awe of his presence?
 
@enumaris Probably while his cousin wife brings us tea. No thanks.
Never forget
Feb 2 '17 at 19:23, by AccidentalFourierTransform
@heather Einstein banged his cousin
 
I'd probably go back 300 years, show them a touchscreen phone and I'll be the coolest kid around, I'll be called McMagic and I'll predict the future and be like Doctor Strange.
 
6:53 PM
Witch hunts
Boi
 
@ACuriousMind not if you went back far enough to when he was with the mathematician
 
@ACuriousMind well, calculus was invented precisely to solve that type of question
 
@enumaris Did he have the crazy hair at that time, though?
 
If I could go back in time, I would meet myself before I did something cringy...and punch myself
 
@ACuriousMind Oh god Heather's reply
 
6:54 PM
then get arrested for punching a teenager
 
@AvnishKabaj That transcript is one of the funniest moments in h bar history :P
 
10/10 agree
Regulars should keep a log
So that temps like me can chortle
 
Ahh, I still can't figure out what dV/dt exactly means. So we have a function V(t) = (something we haven't figured out yet?) and so what? How does that relate to anything? :((
 
V(t) = voltage at time t
implying that it changes
 
yes. why do we use derivatives?
 
6:56 PM
so dV/dt = change of voltage at time t
Instead of...always using average changes?
average changes lose detail
 
@NovaliumCompany Think about how the voltage of a (plate) capacitor is a function of how much charge sits on its plates
 
since they must be averaged over some time scale
 
Sid
@enumaris you get arrested for that stuff?
 
So, in essence, the rate of change of voltage of a capacitor is just a measure of how fast its plates are being drained of charge
 
@Sid not sure...I haven't built a time machine and punched myself to test it
@ACuriousMind or filled with charge
 
6:58 PM
So it makes sense that this rate of change of voltage should be related to the true rate of change of charge - the current - only by a proportionality factor
 
That proportionality factor's name? Einstein
Sorry I meant Capacitance
 
@ACuriousMind I can't understand what you are talking about sorry. I'm a simple person, this example is IQ 160+
 
I scored from 125 to 180 on IQ tests back when I was a kid and thought IQ was cool...the variance is too high for me to draw any conclusions lol
 
@NovaliumCompany Okay, I'll try more coherently: 1. Are we in agreement that this equation is for a capacitor, and that the voltage of a capacitor is determined by how much charge sits on its plates?
 
^ yep
@enumaris Imagine it saying: You have an IQ of 0 - 200 IQ. xD I choose to believe in 200.
 
7:01 PM
@NovaliumCompany 2. Are we also in agreement that this means that the rate of change of voltage for a capacitor is essentially just the rate of change of charge that sits on its plates?
 
The term rate of change of voltage confuses me.
 
(If you agree that X=Y, then you must agree that 'rate of change of X' = 'rate of change of Y')
@NovaliumCompany It's just a measure for how fast the voltage changes!
 
My GRE score was 4 standard devs above the average, so I should have an IQ of 160. (Somebody post me to r/Iamverysmart please)
 
Like the slope of a hill is a measure for how fast its height changes
 
So the change in voltage, not the rate of change of voltge?
It's quite late here in Bulgaria, maybe my brain is tired. Shall I return back tommorow? ;\
 
7:04 PM
@enumaris Funny thing, child IQ tests a incommensurable with adult IQ tests and different IQ tests may also use different scales for the number of points for a standard deviation. It's not trivial to find commensurable scores.
 
Actually I don't know how many standard deviations my percentile score translates to
 
@NovaliumCompany I'm talking about the rate of change. If I just talked about a change, I'd have to talk about a specific interval of time during which that change happens.
 
so I'm just talking out of my ass lol
 
@ACuriousMind Got it.
 
@enumaris Clear sign of someone with an IQ > 150.
 
7:05 PM
XD
There's some degrees of freedom shenanigans going on in the conversion iirc
 
I'm trying to imagine 'rate of change' of voltage but it's quite hard. I imagine change in voltage as the voltage changes, but what about rate of change?
nvm
my midn is really tired
I can barely read and understand what I'm saying.
@ACuriousMind Thanks for your time. I'll be back tommorow, and hopefully this wall, blocking my mind's normal cognitive skills, will be gone.
 
kk, have a good night, then
 
hard stuff
did anybody post me to r/iamverysmart by the way? I've been tryin to get on there...
 
nope
 
Anonymous
@enumaris You need a 200+ IQ to get there.
 
7:14 PM
:(
 
 
1 hour later…
8:18 PM
... and now for something completely different: anyone can recommend good electronic music in the style of Tangerine Dream or Klaus Schulze?
 
i've read that lev landau (who would turn 111 years old today) was an atheist, but I couldn't find any serious reference to back this up.
can someone find such a reference?
 
is not the fact he was Russian enough?
 
no, he was against ortodox church or something like that. it looks like they used to be religious
btw I've read that his son died in 2011 (14th may). i dont know what his grand daughter is becoming
his son was a physicist
but i need to know with absolute certainty that he was atheist , and i'd like to see his own words about that
what is the correct stack exchange website to ask whether landau was atheist?
 
8:34 PM
Here's a task for myself. I have a 7 day vacation from school. I am going to learn this god damn calculus no matter how hard once and for all, so I can never bother to learn it again.
I'm saying this here to have like a 'digital motivation'. It's like I've made a promise to myself virtually.
Nevermind. I'm going to bed. I'm waking up early tommorow and starting with calculus.
 
9:06 PM
omg
 
 
1 hour later…
10:30 PM
Last night dream has a thought experiment where Einstein is walking across a bridge trying to outran a light pulse. The bridge is also subjected to pretty strong pulses of gravity thus it flexes and wanes like a wave (to be detailed later in a diagram)
(Of course he never outran it)
But what's interesting about this dream is a regular spacing of spacetime slices is taken on this curved spacetime (as the bridge has a pulse of gravity travelling through it just behind where Einstein is, so representing the whole region as a spacetime manifold it will have some curvature)
Under these regular spacing, the worldline of the light pulse appeared as a sequence of dots regularly spaced along the geodesics of the manifold. And from that I am starting to suspect why momentum has to be tied with wavenumber
So classically in Newtonian spacetime, velocity measures how frequently something repeats in space when all 1 second snapshots are overlaid on top of each other
Here the particle in all snapshots is at some well defined position (x,y,z)
Now, using De Broglie's suggestion, a particle position instead get smeared out into probability amplitudes to form a wavefunction. Thus looking at the diagram of all time slices overlaid on top of each other, it now looks like a continuous wave where the wavelengths of each component (as determined by the Fourier transform) are exactly how far the peaks and trough are spaced out
Likewise taking space slices instead of time slices, and run the argument similarly, the position of the particle and the peaks/troughs of the wave repeats every e.g. 1m. Thus this is the frequency
We knew that infinitesimal displacement and infinitesimal time displacement is a generator of momentum and energy, and both of these quantities are conserved if translation and time translation are conserved respectively as told by Noether's theorem.
Now moving to SR and GR, the velocity and momentum 4 vector directs the direction and magnitude on some object in spacetime, thus momentum and energy is united to form the energy-momentum
and thus, with these concepts in mind, and h supposed to be the smallest possible scale, the reason why: $$E=hf, p=\frac{h}{\lambda}$$ becomes apparent
Anything else is too long thus I am going to do it in another room
@vzn Never thought I can get something this concrete out of dreams. I wonder if it actually holds in the mathematical framework...
So I guess, in a timeless language, "what is motion?" Motion is how the same object is replicated in space when we take away time. Thus if momentum is discrete, we would be seeing an object teleporting from one point to the next as time passes
 
11:18 PM
@NovaliumCompany there is too much calculus in physics to vow never to learn it again I’m afraid.
 
learn it!
 
I’d be surprised if you could get through s phd without learning new calculus
does anybody get why I don’t need to consider the centrifugal force in this?
 
can't view images unfortunately
 
11:34 PM
One day might do this calculation: A massive observer travelling alongside a light pulse while a planar gravitational pulse sweeps from behind
 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

« first day (3001 days earlier)      last day (1929 days later) »