« first day (4921 days earlier)      last day (30 days later) » 

1:26 AM
@ACuriousMind yay monodromy groups
 
2:05 AM
@ACuriousMind I understand what is meant by non abelian stokes theorem and that's the way I see the claim that the connection is fully specified by it's monodromies. However what is the precise formulation of said theorem
 
@Semiclassical What else are you trying to bombard? The electrons are just there, they will do their thing, but it wont be interesting to nuclear physics. Photons will also be there, doing their thing.
 
fair enough
 
@imbAF yes, e.g. "momentum eigenstates" of the free particle Hamiltonian. Or the continuous spectrum, electron going to infinity, part of the Hydrogen atom
 
2:58 AM
note that, by the fact that they are unbound, they are not normalisable and thus do not actually live in the Hilbert space. They live in Rigged Hilbert space, and are a generalisation of "states". Actually acceptable quantum states still have to be normalisable, and thus cannot be a specific stationary generalisation-of-states
 
@ACuriousMind i cant even imagine living in a society that not only believe in these values but is able to collectively embody this in their actions. that seems to be such a huge privilege.
but that is great
 
 
1 hour later…
4:12 AM
let the structure group’s lie algebra be a matrix lie algebra. Then, what is the meaning of $dg$ in a gauge transformation?
 
4:34 AM
@Relativisticcucumber Actually, that is the hooman norm. Hoomans are social creatures and the surviving civilisations are all social in nature. Not at all like snakes. It is the capitalists that are deviant
 
5:31 AM
the index form of the lie algebra valued $3$-form $A \wedge dA$ is like $T_a T_b A^a_i \partial_j A_i^b dx^i \wedge dx^j \wedge dx^k$, right?
also why do people often omit the differential forms? can we replace them with a levi-cevita symbol or something?
(for the special case of $3$-forms)
(1) the differential form part of these lie algebra valued form quantities gives rise to a coordinate labeled antisymmetry. (2) this makes the whole quantity antisymmetric under coordinate index transpositions. (3) the levi-cevita symbol does this to tensors as well. (4) just replace $dx^i \wedge dx^j \wedge dx^k$ with $\epsilon^{ijk}$ and call it a day?
darn when there's commutators and anti-commutators what other brackets can i use in my expressions other than $()$ D:
only bigger $()$s...
and then in second line first term, is witten just explicitly writing out the antisymmetric part of the term?
because we could also just write $A_i\partial_j A_k$?
 
5:51 AM
@SillyGoose this is 3D space? If so, yes, the levi-civita symbol and the differential volume form are strongly related to each other.
 
@naturallyInconsistent right in 3D
 
Well, if the author assumes that readers are not versed in differential forms language, this is a possible swap. But it seems like the author is assuming the opposite, that the readers already know the usual differential forms notation. After all, if you have an integral of A wedge A wedge A, without the integration element, then it means that A is itself a differential form. i.e. the first line is necessarily in differential forms notation, and the 2nd line is its coördinate expansion
 
oh i see the relation is triple wedge goes to $\epsilon^{ijk}/2$ and witten's explicit writing of the antisymmetric part of the first term makes no difference.
 
6:16 AM
bruh why do these notes call computing the change of the chern-simons action a simple exercise
 
@SillyGoose just like how a theoretical physicist's training consists of ever higher sophistication of the treatment of QHO being considered simple, and of a HEP physicist considering ever heavier massive particles as massless Nambu Goldstone bosons.
 
Is there a distribution function which properly captures exoplanets?
 
6:39 AM
Can I use this https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/811709/150174 to calculate the probability of life using empirical probability of parity symmetry?

0. Evolution is a process that assigns a probability that life can appear on any scale
1. Assume there exists an action which time evolves to give almost parity symmetric organisms and fit the proababilities based on that from earth
2. Can we use scaling arguments from FLRW metric + distribution of exoplanets + parity symmetry to find probability distribution of life habiting exoplanets?
Just some thoughts
I have to think harder on this
Conversation would help me clarify my thoughts
Actually FLRW metric + parity symmetry arguement = distribution of exoplanets?
 
7:01 AM
Actually it would be cool if the distribution of exoplanets obeyed the same parity behavior
 
7:50 AM
hi
 
 
2 hours later…
9:36 AM
@ACuriousMind since you are my adopted father does that mean i can become german
 
9:47 AM
Can I be your brother? I want to be German too
Looks like ACM went to get milk
 
 
2 hours later…
11:19 AM
Hi @JohnRennie ! I would like to ask you a question about one of your stack exchange posts (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/367083/radiation-from-cosmological-horizons).

I was having a conversation in another physics forum about horizons (like the event horizon of a black hole, or a cosmological horizon) emitting Hawking radiation and I mentioned that if the universe keeps an accelerating expansion there will be a radiating cosmological hoizon (as the universe approaches a de Sitter space) therefore culminating in an asymptotic non-zero temperature.
 
@vengaq Hi :-)
The radiation does not come from the horizon, just like Hawking radiation does not come from the black hole horizon.
Your correspondent is quite correct that particles emitted from the cosmological horizon would take an infinite time to reach us, but since the particles don't come from the horizon this isn't a problem.
 
11:44 AM
Is it possible in GR to glue the boundary of a closed subset of a spacetime? What I mean is that can you glue 2 time-like separated leaves of a Cauchy foliation. I can't imagine that the resulting quotient space would be another subset of a spacetime?
 
12:22 PM
@RyderRude hey,n
 
12:32 PM
@MoreAnonymous hey
 
12:43 PM
@JohnZimmerman i think it wud produce CTCs
 
@RyderRude i think you're right
would be more of a Riemmanian geometry construct
 
 
1 hour later…
2:18 PM
@RyderRude Any book recommendation?
 
2:54 PM
@SirCumference hi. what math fields have the most enjoyable proofs
@MoreAnonymous what r ur interests
@MoreAnonymous read Nakahara's book if u r interested in topological invariant groups associated to manifolds
 
Don't read that book unless you want to spend a year learning how to re-state simple things you already know in big words
 
but u recommended it!
i find it really good becuz it's informal and doesnt go around proving tiny details @bolbteppa
 
Although I would recommend GSW, twitter hype on Polchinski would not be a bad thing to fall for, these and these lectures follow it
 
these lectures would take decades to watch
 
It would take just over 2 days if you sat there consecutively to watch the first set, the second set do the same material I don't know where the differences are
The real problem is when you get stuck on something simple for a week/month
The way he does the lightcone particle should give anybody a weeks worth of pause
 
3:04 PM
i sometimes find books to be too comprehensive. is it betr to follow a university course? @bolbteppa
i guess books are like tree branches and courses are more linear and focused
@bolbteppa is this analogy correct
 
The ideal is a set of lectures where the lecturer follows a book but explains all the missing details and makes it all incredibly obvious and does it in a way that explains why other sources do things differently, good luck finding that
 
oh
i lose attention while watching videos and hav to rewind
 
my attempt to make a mass spectrometer with Tikz accidentally came out a lot more questionable than i intended
 
If I asked Skynet to make a diagram like that for me, it would take forever to get it right
 
tbh i mostly stole it
i wanted to show two trajectories, one clockwise and another counterclockwise
and accidentally made it more phallic than intended
 
3:16 PM
I can now see it another way too...
 
one thing i did find myself wondering about. the setup shown above is the one you usually see in intro physics books, and it includes the velocity selector before the magnetic sector
but most other mass spectrometers i've seen seem to go directly to the magnetic sector
is it just that the intro physics books use the velocity selector b/c it's an easy example for the Lorentz force?
 
4:22 PM
@ACuriousMind i largely agree with this sentiment, but the one caveat i'd put on this is that educators are certainly not free---teaching deserves to be properly compensated, so cost will enter in that way. (this in spite of how much the Uni's would prefer if educators did work for free, given the reliance on teaching assistants and adjuncts...)
 
4:37 PM
@RyderRude As much as I hated my Calculus on Manifolds class for how it was taught, I actually did really enjoy the proofs
they were often geometric and visual
 
4:59 PM
@Relativisticcucumber well, there's a thousand things wrong over here, too, but sure :)
@Semiclassical yes, of course - "education should be free" doesn't mean education somehow comes about without cost, it means that the cost is paid by society at large rather than individuals
 
@Semiclassical But European educators are paid, even if the students are not the ones paying them.
 
fqq
the uk has the highest cost of education and some of the worst working conditions in europe
 
@SirCumference oh
i havent yet encountered many proofs in this field
@ACuriousMind what are two concrete examples respectively of using philosophy to reason what one can know and what one should do
 
what does "using philosophy" mean
 
5:16 PM
it means using philosophical knowledge to reason about things
 
Hmm, i haven't read any philosophy books or taken any classes, so idk :P
 
same
i started to read some but they got boring
 
Oh that's a bit of a surprise. From what I gathered on here, I thought you were big into philosophy.
 
Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order is about hidden variables, so it is ultimately dull
@Obliv i am. i explore the questions on my own
e.g. thinking for a while about consciousness and coming up with an organised explanation
 
My biggest issue with philosophy as a subject to engage with others is the language mostly. I already nit-pick in math/physics and those are supposed to be more standardized and formalized.
 
5:23 PM
There is a certain psychological bias, that people tend to think of themselves as somewhat the norm. For example, geniuses like Turing would think that humans in general are generally smart. Maybe not as smart as they themselves would be, but their conception of the average human is often way smarter than the actual facts. That's why he would have come up with things like Turing's test.
It is, however, now made utterly clear that the Turing test, as naïvely written, had already been passed with flying colours: there are a lot of people who would engage in lively conversation with chatGPT style meaningless statements, be it from digital sources, or wet organic sources.
 
@Obliv yes. philosophy isnt objective and can be either far from or close to meaningless or somewhere in between
the philosophies, which become undebatable and objective, become sciences @Obliv
 
how useful is java in physics or real world lol
I've come to the realization I've only learned java and I'm worried if i transition to another language I will carry bad habits D:
 
6:03 PM
@Obliv In this chat room, you don't talk about the real world.
 
6:22 PM
@ACuriousMind yeah, that's a good way of putting it
@RyderRude i mean. one chapter or so in it is hidden variables
and said chapter is about 2/3 of the way through
i guess there's a line of argument that the hidden variables stuff "informs" the rest, but stuff like the rheomode and his discussions of wholeness etc really don't have much of that character
(which doesn't mean i take that much interest in them now---i haven't reread the book in years---but dismissing it as all just "hidden variables" is kinda silly to me)
 
@Obliv I think Java is a pretty horrible language for all the boilerplate code that it makes you do. However, it is a rather normal language if you strip away the boilerplate, and so you might find other languages easy to learn, since the concepts from Java can map to them.
 
6:50 PM
I was watching a bit of one of witten’s lecture on geometric Langland and he writes $SU(2) \otimes SU(2)$. Surely he knows this is not what he means to say. So for who is he writing stuff like this for and why?
@RyderRude after looking at some of nakahara it kind of seems as a poor resource to learn maths that one does not already know from. But im not sure about the algebraic topology sections
 
7:30 PM
@RyderRude fiction
 
7:46 PM
Oh no will there one day be a quantum relativistic cucumber @Relativisticcucumber
@MoreAnonymous the waves or mrs. Dalloway by woolf :D. Or for some quirkiness the crying of lot 49 by thomas pynchon
Or the fall by albert camus
 
tthanks
 
If you would like something psychological the idiot by dostoevsky (or anything else by him)
My final suggestion is if you just want something curiously absurd, gravity’s rainbow by pynchon
 
thanks again
Also can game theory be applied to Ludwig Wittgenstein's notion of a language game?
I suspect yes
 
 
1 hour later…
9:00 PM
@MoreAnonymous searching for that might be hard
because "language game theory" could be understood either as "game theory as applied to language games" or as "Wittgenstein's theory of language games"
the latter seems to be more prevalant via google
that said, this might be in the vein you're looking fo
 
9:36 PM
is homology and cohomology only prevalent in high energy theory?
 
@JohnRennie thank you for your explanation. Besides, as far as I know, we wouldn't need to be near the horizon to observe it, as the radiation could travel inwards and the thermal bath would have a global effect in the observable universe, right?
 
10:07 PM
@SillyGoose you do see it in condensed matter, typically for classifying defects
tho i think that's more homotopy/homology and less cohomology
 

« first day (4921 days earlier)      last day (30 days later) »