« first day (3068 days earlier)      last day (1865 days later) » 

enumaris
enumaris
3:54 AM
wot wot
 
dmckee
dmckee
 
enumaris
enumaris
nothin lol
been busy so haven't been around...
 
 
2 hours later…
John Rennie
John Rennie
5:56 AM
@amanuel2 I had to go I'm afraid. I'm around for a few hours now.
@amanuel2 if you want to ask questions like this then we have a special room for that where we won't get interrupted by other chatter:

 Problem Solving Strategies

General chat for high school physics. For MathJax see [here](m...
1
20
 
Captain Bohemian
Captain Bohemian
@JohnRennie that room may be like our exercise courses chaired by teaching assistants.
 
Anonymous
6:53 AM
@EmilioPisanty I'm facing a moral dilemma regarding your answer here. No, seriously: on one hand I do like the idea of enclosing Unicode expressions within $$ (e.g. $|ψ⟩⊗|ϕ⟩$) as if we can apply that uniformly it'll improve the duplicate searching and "Related" sidebar.
 
Anonymous
On the other hand I'm worried that hardly anyone actually searches (in-site or from external search engines) using Unicode characters. People mostly search using ASCII characters (and the power users might as well set up a Data Explorer query in case they want to search for specific MathJax sequences in titles). So that makes me wonder whether it'll mess up the search results.
 
Anonymous
Also, some people expressed their disapproval of how "terrible" MathJax-ed Unicode looks on-site e.g. $|ψ⟩⊗|ϕ⟩$ vs. $|\psi\rangle \otimes |\phi\rangle$ and that it's inconsistent in case the proper MathJax is used in the question body (yeah, I'm aware of your comment here).
 
Anonymous
Taking into account these factors, I wonder whether it's actually worth enforcing Unicode titles or MathJax-ed Unicode titles. The bigger problem is really that we don't have a sufficiently advanced search yet, which'll look for all possible MathJax and Unicode variations.
 
Anonymous
7:14 AM
 
Anonymous
Theres's also this argument. ^
 
Anonymous
> MathJax has this feature now, what if they decide to drop it to be more in line with LaTeX syntax? Or, what if SE decides to use another math formatting library in the future that doesn't have this feature?
 
Anonymous
> Why use LaTeX commands for most things and Unicode characters for a small portion of them? It's not consistent.
 
Anonymous
> If you use Unicode characters in your formula, then you cannot directly use the formula anymore in a LaTeX document.
 
Anonymous
> For some symbols the font is different
 
Anonymous
7:18 AM
> These are small downsides, but to be honest I can't think of any upside of using Unicode characters: they're hard to input for most people, compared to ASCII.
 
ChoMedit
ChoMedit
9:17 AM
Is it worth to study Julian Schwinger's frameworks on explaning quantum phenomena? I heard that it is kind of effective(effective in the sense of EffectiveFT), phenomenological, Pragmatical frameworks to explain microscopic phenomena, commonly explained by QFT. I've already seen this thread, physics.stackexchange.com/questions/98694/…, but I'm still curious if it's still valid approach on understanding quantum phenomena.
...and in addition, is there any experiment to test which one is correct. (QFT(Operator based) or Schwinger's source theory and its relevant framenwork)
 
 
1 hour later…
Slereah
Slereah
10:45 AM
@ChoMedit Quantum action formalism you mean?
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
11:05 AM
@Blue Not true, you can e.g. use unicode-math and compile with XeTeX or LuaTeX.
 
Anonymous
@ACuriousMind Yeah, that's like yet another \usepackage{}.
 
ChoMedit
ChoMedit
I'm not sure it's called "Quantum action formalism" but, Schwinger developed his source theory using Quantum action principle.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
I'm not saying that this fully vindicates its use, but to say that you "cannot" use unicode math in a proper LaTeX document is simply wrong.
 
user8718165
user8718165
11:42 AM
0
Q: Does soap repel water?

user8718165Yesterday when I was taking my bath, I scratched my soap bar a bit and threw that bit on the shower area floor. There was a little amount of water on the floor tile where that soap bit fell. To my surprise, I noticed that the the water around that soap bit had moved away surrounding it. I'm cluel...

electrostatics
Could somebody please help me with this question? I'd really be blessed.
 
 
3 hours later…
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
2:13 PM
 
 
2 hours later…
Ba'lroc Demos
Ba'lroc Demos
3:54 PM
I know that non mainstream thoughts and theories are frown upon in PSE but its such a waste. Seems like it may make this for into a bit of a filter bubble. ( Keep in mind that all of todays mainstream theories were once cutting edge.) Perhaps adding a new tag would suffice to. open the forum to speculative ideas. Say "debate" or "speculation". After all who doesn't like to think outside the box from time to time.
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Ba'lrocDemos That non-mainstream theories are off-topic here does not mean that we're saying that you shouldn't think about them. We're just saying that we do not intend this site to be a place for discussing them, at least partly simply because discussion of ideas does not fit well into our Q&A format
 
PM 2Ring
PM 2Ring
@Ba'lrocDemos open the forum to speculative ideas Ah, but stack exchange sites are not forums, they're knowledge repositories structured using the question & answer format. We can have discussions in the chat rooms, though.
In other words, we're more like Wikipedia than a forum. When you go to a Wikipedia page, you expect to find a structured presentation of facts, you don't expect to see a bunch of people having a discussion & voicing their opinions.
Sure, some discussion happens behind the scenes on the Wikipedia talk pages. And on stack exchange sites we have some discussion in the comments, but those discussions are intended to clarify & improve the primary content, which is the OP's question & the answers to it.
 
vzn
vzn
4:14 PM
discussion
 
 
2 hours later…
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
5:46 PM
why this group has a logo of PhysicsSE
 
PM 2Ring
PM 2Ring
6:00 PM
@PranshuKhandal What do you mean? This is the general chat room for Physics SE.
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
do other SE's have there own?
why physics is not in URL?
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@PranshuKhandal yes, every SE site has at least one chatroom. There's no physics in the URL because all these chat rooms lie on a single server.
 
PM 2Ring
PM 2Ring
@PranshuKhandal Yes, other stack exchange sites have 1 or more main chat rooms, and they may have many other additional rooms. Any member with enough rep can create a chat room.
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
what should we discuss in a chat room
 
PM 2Ring
PM 2Ring
@PranshuKhandal All sorts of things! But discussing physics is always a good option. ;) Please see physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11090/…
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
6:14 PM
why is it named as The h bar
 
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
bars a to j already existed ;P
 
PM 2Ring
PM 2Ring
6:29 PM
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
wow, that's amazing
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
6:43 PM
My favorite constant is π bar
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
@SirCumference it feels like 0.9 bar which 0.999999... (bar -- over the digits), so, its like 3.14159... bar
repeating a non-repeating sequence of digits, lol
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
@PranshuKhandal Oh I was just talking about pi bar = pi/2pi
If we have h bar we can bar everything
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
emoji don't work here
text
found some interesting terms: lemma, lem~i~niscate
that's lemniscate
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
7:02 PM
@PranshuKhandal Oh I thought I was talking to ACM for a min. For clarity pi bar isn't a real thing lol
 
PranshuKhandal
PranshuKhandal
lemma is truly interesting, but none of the lemmas are interesting, that's why they are lemma
what's ACM?
 
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference
ACuriousMind, one of the guys who responded to you a few mins ago
 
 
1 hour later…
Physics Meta
Physics Meta
8:06 PM
0
Q: What to do to my duplicate marked question?

PranshuKhandalI recently asked a question Can't we make big magnetic plate to levitate using gravity? [duplicate]. Maybe late, but I edited the question to prove it unique, but nothing seems to happen. Should I ask the question again? or ask users who marked it duplicate?

discussion duplicates reopen
 
 
1 hour later…
Captain Bohemian
Captain Bohemian
9:20 PM
[I am surprised that fundamental representations requires so complicated a concept weight to explain](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_(representation_theory)!
 
 
2 hours later…
bolbteppa
bolbteppa
10:53 PM
@CaptainBohemian This sense of the word doesn't ('other uses')
Fundamental representation
In representation theory of Lie groups and Lie algebras, a fundamental representation is an irreducible finite-dimensional representation of a semisimple Lie group or Lie algebra whose highest weight is a fundamental weight. For example, the defining module of a classical Lie group is a fundamental representation. Any finite-dimensional irreducible representation of a semisimple Lie group or Lie algebra can be constructed from the fundamental representations by a procedure due to Élie Cartan. Thus in a certain sense, the fundamental representations are the elementary building blocks for arbitrary...
But the general one does because you're talking about irreducible representations of finite dim semi-simple Lie algebras and you're going to have to link it to Cartan's classification
In other news, so much (my god!) time saved when computing e.g. Klein-Nishina by not blindly expanding everything out but first working out identities for contractions of gamma's in between contracted gamma's, then traces of products, the amount of time saved is shocking
 

« first day (3068 days earlier)      last day (1865 days later) »