« first day (1536 days earlier)      last day (3692 days later) » 

Sachin Shekhar
Sachin Shekhar
01:10
Transformers Robots in the Sky!
What's the best book for String Theory and M-Theory?
Gaurav
Gaurav
@Sofia Please do not mistake me when I used 'a dozen women presidents and prime ministers' in one of the previous comments. I used it as a hyperbole (perhaps a very poor one) to convey that the participation of women in Indian politics is relatively high in general (and not only in prime ministerial or presidential posts), and not any literal meaning.
At present, there are female chief ministers in three Indian states (which is not bad) and the previous chief minister of Delhi (a very presigious post) was also a woman. In the past too, there have been such cases and I hope the future has too. Recently, a eunuch became mayor ! - timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/…
Gaurav
Gaurav
01:27
@Gowtham Well, I voted for Modi because of his solid track record of development, zero corruption at gujrat and not because of incumbency. Such a leader comes only once in many generations, we can't miss the chance.

As for the scientific remark, yes I'm saddened by it, but take comfort when I see that Harvard/Oxford educated congress members make such rational remarks : http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-congress-leader-mani-shankar-aiyar-offers-justification-for-paris-terror-attack-terms-it-backlash-2050969
@alarge The US ban on Modi was a gross over-reaction to some irresponsible media reports, nothing else. The reason for the brouhaha over the riots case was also partially due to the then congress government pressurizing foreign governments to impose a ban based on false evidence, since they saw him as a threat to their political ambitions.
 
2 hours later…
T Abraham
T Abraham
03:34
@MarkMitchison plenio's paper also includes Lindblad equations and Lindblad operators and Makrovian equations...
T Abraham
T Abraham
03:44
@ACuriousMind according to Plenio's paper as linked in @MarkMitchison 's answer to my "Plants and Quantum Mechanics" question, wouldn't $\hbar \omega$ be equivalent to $\epsilon$ ?
Mark Mitchison
Mark Mitchison
@TAbraham Yes, I know. I think that the paper is a bit too advanced for that reason.
As I already said, you should focus on Hamiltonian models for now, such as the one I gave or tight-binding models.
 
5 hours later…
Gaurav
Gaurav
08:41
Maybe the reason for the higher level of accomplishment among the type of scientists you mentioned in your first paragraph is a result of the [observation](http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201008/revenge-the-introvert) that introverts tend to have a higher ability to process information over their extravert counterparts, a valuable quality of a good scientist.

What do you mean when you say "many people interact with that crowd mostly when they are young" ? Does it mean that older people find it more normal for scientists to be introverted ?
@dmckee
Gaurav
Gaurav
08:58
Although I don't know why those which socially mature later on record a higher occurrence of accomplishment. Maybe those which do so are able to convey their thoughts more effectively.
Danu
Danu
09:18
@Qmechanic maybe you could answer my earlier question: Is it possible to directly probe the essential spectrum of an observable experimentally?
 
2 hours later…
Sachin Shekhar
Sachin Shekhar
11:23
What's the best book for String Theory and M-Theory?
alarge
alarge
11:33
@dmckee I agree. Arguably the management aspect, and therefore social interaction, become more important in many areas of science, too, as you gain more senior posts. This, however, applies in all fields. Note that I wasn't saying that all scientists are introverted or socially limited, but rather that there is a correlation (at least in the early discussion I was stating this out explicitly, and implicitly thereafter).
Gaurav
Gaurav
@SachinShekhar physics.stackexchange.com/…; physics.stackexchange.com/…;
John Rennie
John Rennie
While I still have some hair left I'd love some help with this problem. It should be simple but I just don't see it.
In arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0604025.pdf I just don't see how to get eqn 18
From the geodesic equation I get:
d^2t/d\tau^2 = \frac{2}{1+z} dt/d\tau dz/d\tau
I can work back from equ 18 and check it's correct, but I just don't see how it was derived
I'd ask this as a question except that it's blatantly a homework question :-)
Gaurav
Gaurav
@SachinShekhar Most of the times, a google search yields good results. If you aren't satisfied, search this question in the search box on the top-right corner of the main physics.se page. If you're still not satisfied, you might as well ask it as a question.
 
1 hour later…
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
12:51
@JohnRennie Logarithmic derivative: $\frac{\mathrm{d}^2 t / \mathrm{d}\tau^2}{\mathrm{d}t / \mathrm{d}\tau} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\tau}\ln(\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\tau}) = -\frac{2}{1+z}\frac{\mathrm{d}z}{\mathrm{d}\tau} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\tau}\ln(\frac{1}{(1+x)^2})$
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
13:22
No $x$ but a $z$ in the last expression, of course.
 
1 hour later…
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
14:28
What does temporarily suspended to cool down mean?
When you have heated discussions, or go on an abusing spree?
Ref - Margaret Rosa
(Psst - ... of She's back!!! fame )
Jan 8 at 2:37, by Kyle Kanos
She's baaaaaaack
I'd left a small comment on one of @KyleKanos' meta posts, and then I come back after 10 days, to see that meta post has had some battle. And, OP of the post got suspended to cool down!
By the way, this was epic:
How to know someone is full of it: they call racism in a thread discussing automated IP blocks on a site where the race of members is largely unknown. — Shog9 ♦ Jan 12 at 16:14
Shit, I missed the fun :(
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
14:46
@UserAnonymous I think it means that they've been slinging insults or something like that, this suspension is handed out to, well, let them cool down.
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
@ACuriousMind How do the mods know she won't heat up again?
Gowtham
Gowtham
they dont , she will and probably get 1 year ban or sth
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@UserAnonymous They don't know that, that's why suspensions get sucessively longer.
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
I see. That's a nice method.
@ACuriousMind - by the way, did you notice I still have my hats? :P
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@UserAnonymous Yes, but you already told us during winterbash that you'd just made screencaps ;)
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
14:52
I am trying to tease you by reminding of it. OK maybe I failed :P
Or didn't :P
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
I'll consider myself teased, then
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
Well, these weren't that easy to get, and SE just took them off our heads. So, unfair.
(Between the lines - teasing again :P)
@KyleKanos - WTF have you done to your profile pic?
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@UserAnonymous Just be glad they didn't take off our heads with them ;)
User Anonymous
User Anonymous
@ACuriousMind - Considering that your CuriousMind resides in your head, you should be happier than me.
Bye guys :)
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
15:21
@UserAnonymous I changed it. It's now no longer SN 1987A but a simulation of a remnant I made
Gaurav
Gaurav
TBH, I think Margaret Rosa deserves the 1 year ban more than Wolfram Johny does.
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
@Gaurav There's a procedure for temporary bans: hours/day(?) -> 7 days -> 30 days -> 1 year
Johny hit all the previous ones, Margie hasn't
Gaurav
Gaurav
@KyleKanos Oh, but I've never seen him suspended before. Was he?
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
Yes he was
AFAIK, he only recently changed his name to Wolphram Johny
He was Julian Fernandez before that
Gaurav
Gaurav
15:38
Whoa ! Never noticed that !
John Rennie
John Rennie
16:11
@ACuriousMind Thanks :-)
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
16:26
@Gaurav Yeah, it wasn't until I noticed that he was suspended that I found that out.
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
16:37
Glad the NCAA got owned on this: espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/…
Physics Meta
Physics Meta
17:02
0
Q: Why are off-topic questions banned?

ghosts_in_the_codeI recently asked a question about a theory proposed by someone I know. It is not a scientifically known one, but it is not so obviously true or false that one can avoid speculating on it, to reason out why it should be false. I admit, it was not a "mainstream" question as required by the site. M...

discussion feature-request scope
Sofia
Sofia
17:16
@KyleKanos : can you help a bit? I reformulated a question that was put on hold on reasons of home-exercise. There are a lot of home exercises, and the policy here is against home-exercises, though a possibility is left - a "good" formulation.
@MarkMitchison : I address my problem to you too.
I reformulated that question. Would you have a look? Can the question be re-opened under the new formulation?
Mark Mitchison
Mark Mitchison
@Sofia I voted to reopen, looks like an interesting question after your edits.
Sofia
Sofia
@MarkMitchison : first of all thank you. But I also have a desire and I don't know if it will be allowed. You see, time-independent conservative fields have the interesting property that very strongly appears in this case : after the collision, the motion looks exactly as before, just the movement is away from the collision point, and not towards it. (I continue)
I would like to put an additional entry to that question, namely, how compare $\Delta p_1 / p_1'$ and $\Delta p_2 / p_2'$, where $p_1'$ and $p_2'$ are immediately after collision. One of the answers to such a question is that in a conservative, time-independent field, the movement is symmetrical to the time-reversal. This $p_1' = -p_1$ and $p_2' = p_2$. By me, that would be an interesting new entry. But the law is that in 1 question one asks 1 thing.
If I add this entry the question can be blocked again, although I saw many questions with more than 1 entry. The rules here are so uneven.
Kyle Kanos
Kyle Kanos
17:48
@Sofia We prefer 1 question per post, but if there are 2 (maybe 3) closely related questions, we'll take them both at once. More than that, you have to cut some of the extra questions out.
Sofia
Sofia
18:29
@KyleKanos, and @MarkMitchison, O.K. then I'll add nothing. The reformulation will remain as it is now.
 
1 hour later…
T Abraham
T Abraham
19:35
@MarkMitchison wouldn't $\hbar \omega$ be equivalent to $\epsilon$ ?
Sofia
Sofia
20:09
@ACuriousMind : I noticed right now a remark of yours at the site with your profile : "Having all the answers just means that you've been asking boring questions". Well, that made me contemplate my questions: I have very few satisfactory answers. I think that my questions are even more than boring, (or probably, out of the line of this site). Well, what to do, people ask those questions for which they need answers, and they are happy if someone can help.
ACuriousMind
ACuriousMind
@Sofia Note that not having all the answers does not imply that one has been asking interesting questions ;)
Sofia
Sofia
20:37
@ACuriousMind : that's exactly what I say about my questions : far from being interesting.conclude
@ACuriousMind (a correction) that's exactly what I conclude about my questions: that they are far from being interesting
alarge
alarge
21:23
@Sofia Well at least your questions have usually sparked debate and in some cases I think the answer (or, at least, a partial one) is in the comments
Sofia
Sofia
21:37
@alarge , my remark was just humoristic a bit, the Curious Mind said that getting too many answers means that the questions are boring. I commented that it may be worse, i.e. getting too few answers. That means, the questions are outside the lines of this site. But, bottom line, one remains empty-handed. Well, I am just joking, I would be glad if these were my biggest troubles.
 
1 hour later…
Physics Meta
Physics Meta
23:02
0
Q: What is the site policy on (illegal) drug-related questions?

Time4TeaCould someone please clarify this for me? I flagged this question earlier today as abusive: Question about how smoke and combustion works Because it had a drugs reference (which seemed to be unnecessary and not particularly related to physics). However, another user (I won't name names) with a ...

discussion

« first day (1536 days earlier)      last day (3692 days later) »