« first day (1783 days earlier)      last day (1710 days later) » 

12:00 AM
@ACuriousMind Never mind. I think it got it.
12:36 AM
@skillpatrol You're...a bit late to discover that :P
Seriously, that happened in 2007. Still a good story to tell med students, though :P
@punkerplunk Skimming over your conversation, I think the crux of the issue is this. In the standard twin paradox, there are 3 inertial frames: Earth, outgoing twin, and ingoing twin. This is only a paradox when you equate the outgoing and ingoing frames. Just like in the Monty Hall problem, missing the fact that there are 3 distinct doors reference frames leads to the trouble.
The traveling twin's full path cannot be made inertial, no matter what you do.
12:44 AM
I'm not trying to do that
I'm trying to fit the earth into a separate inertial frame
You can use any frame you want, but Earth will always be traveling at constant velocity in an inertial frame, and the constant velocity path between two points in spacetime always has the longest proper time.
why is that so?
@punkerplunk Because time-like geodesics are locally path-length (proper time) maximizing. That's essentially the reverse triangle inequality NeuroFuzzy linked to you.
@NeuroFuzzy Sample both and do whichever is most fun? When I started undergrad, I picked out 4 graduate courses that sounded more awesome than everything else: GR, QFT, algebra, and number theory. But in the end I only had time for 2 of them (GR and algebra). Such is life.
Be glad you can even attend school
But my model depicts an earth NOT traveling at a constant velocity
12:54 AM
@NeuroFuzzy I will say that it's the first exposure to a subject that has had the biggest impact on my thinking (assuming it's a good exposure). That is, I think undergrad algebra and QM made me a wiser person so to speak, whereas the advanced courses just made me more knowledgeable about that particular subject.
@punkerplunk Well, then you don't have an inertial frame (since if an object has constant velocity in one inertial frame, it has constant velocity in all inertial frames). You can do this, but at best you have smoothly accelerating coordinates, and at worst you have kinks and singularities in your coordinates.
In any event, the answer you get has to be the same. Physics doesn't depend on choice of coordinates, even really difficult and obtuse coordinates ;)
as, indeed, there are in observation
@skillpatrol ACM is right
I'm pretty sure it's been linked in chat before.
1:12 AM
So, do you agree, than, it would be possible (theoretically, if not technically) or feasible, at least to 'invert' the effect demonstrated by the twin conjecture (because by now we all a agree it's not a paradox), by traveling at some arbitrarily high speed, visit a location and return to be the older twin? Given that the earth is not 'inertial' and is moving, say, relative to something, such as Uber Massif(depicted above).
@Chris White
your only hope is that (1) Earth is accelerating (not just moving) with respect to an inertial frame, and (2) there is a more direct (less acceleration) path you can take to meet up with it again
I suppose you could do this with our orbit around the Sun (or the Sun around the galaxy).
Just push off in the opposite direction, hold position, and wait for Earth to meet you again.
Of course, the effect would be minuscule.
@punkerplunk when your opponent says "do you agree", you always say no
no. 1 of debate
1:19 AM
pshh I don't need rules to debate
that's just another debate
some debate rounds turn into debates over the constitution of the debate style
it's pretty sad
like when NPDA people say you need plans in IPDA policy rounds
I would think the #1 rule of diplomacy is to say "yes, but..." rather than "no"
this chat is not a diplomacy, the goal is to #rek the other people
@Chris, thank you.
any minuscule effect can be scaled
just work to first order
ignore miniscule effects
@punkerplunk is a bandit
he tried to lure me into an alley and steal my stuff
1:28 AM
honestly, the alley suddenly appeared around me! out of some isomorphic translation across a tangent dimension I cannot comprehend
. . . I might be a bandit, though
@punkerplunk BS
someone get this man away from me
I'm being violated, and not in the good way
@0celo7 Did you develop a fever and are now delirious?
@ACuriousMind turns out I did not have a fever
but my cough is getting worse :O
Almost typed "delicious" there.
these cough drops aren't doing anything
1:34 AM
hmm, are you a smoker?
@ACuriousMind I don't need to have a fever to be delicious ;)
@punkerplunk no
@0celo7 . . . well i'm stumped, than.
it's some lung thing, I got meds for it
but I can't take the full power cough meds because there's codeine in there
codeine = sleep
Don't see the bad thing about sleep
Do your drugs, kid ;)
::does homework::
I do
@HDE226868 will now comment about homework
1:36 AM
ewww, just don't do homework
nobody will care in 3000 years if you did homework
Nobody will care in 3000 years about anything we ever did, probably.
in this class each homework is 5% of the grade :O
@ACuriousMind hah, says the theoretician
I have a chance of being remembered
@0celo7 Yeah, if you blow us all (okay, almost all to be remembered) up.
@ACuriousMind remove the "up" and you have what I read the first time around
If you have an online persona, you will already be preserved for posterity by the archivists/NSA
1:38 AM
hello NSA
@0celo7 I don't think that'd be that memorable
@0celo7 What? I have an opinion about homework? Nonsense.
you said the magic word, now someone is watching us
But I admit the parentheses are awkwardly placed :D
the real question is, does the nature of discussion change while under observation?
1:39 AM
@ACuriousMind I guess Mr. Mismatched Socks is a player
@punkerplunk interesting...
and ACM has taken this chat into an awk direction
that doesn't negate the true of his assertion
i'd remember
just stop
for one, @HDE226868 is a kid
that's just gross!
and @ChrisWhite is an old man
@0celo7 A gentleman never tells...
that's gross too!
@0celo7 You are, too:
Jul 30 at 21:27, by 0celo7
I'm not even an adult.
1:42 AM
too quick
do you have that saved
@ACuriousMind give me another month
No, just searched for "even an adult" and picked the top result.
@0celo7 True. Although I'm 17 now, so I'm most likely no longer a minor in more jurisdictions.
Well, we're the same age
I already killed three people by 17
1:44 AM
@0celo7 I would guess you're closer to 18, though.
1 min ago, by 0celo7
@ACuriousMind give me another month
Okay, so an 11-month difference.
@punkerplunk I done killed more cats than curiosity, snitch. - Busta Rhymes
I don't think anyone appreciates my random rap lyrics.
oh, i do
1:55 AM
long before Einstein was a physicist, he was a ladies man.
you ruined it.
sorry, I do that. I'll just be quiet until someone says something I can refute
2:01 AM
lol, don't take us too seriously.
wouldn't take you any other way
@ACuriousMind who's in ur profile pic?
ACM is back to his true colour. (in my perspective).
see. weirdo
@StanShunpike Dak'kon, bearer of the Circle of Zerthimon. Another character from Planescape: Torment.
2:08 AM
@0celo7 You are too, in a way.
@0celo7 Did you miss the color/synaesthesia discussion a while back?
Everything fits now.
It looks right.
@ACuriousMind no, but it's still weird
@obe no
@0celo7 I wanted to say your colour fits with your image too.
@obe yeah right
2:12 AM
@0celo7 You're 0.53% weird.
that's not bad
means I'm 99.something% normal
something%. legit.
my prof had blue/black socks this week.
he sympathizes with acm.
In my mind, "university professor" is not a good role model, but I know this chat will disagree.
what do you mean?
I'm saying being like a strange prof is not something "good"
2:21 AM
are you a bad role model?
the reason I began this physics business is due to you.
I'm doing homework the night it's due while sick
that's sweet
idk if it was a bad idea.
well I'm not even doing pure physics
2:23 AM
i had the impression you were.
He talks about his engineering background all the time
tfw i realized 0celo7 is an engineer guy.
I'm confused
I'm not studying physics
I thought this was common knowledge
It is common knowledge.
2:24 AM
then i'm subpar for now.
is he trolling
bets prophesies have been made on when 0celo7 will see the errors of his ways.
@ACuriousMind better not, I'll lose my in-state tuition and scholarships
although, I wonder if I can add a math double major with my current financial plan
2:26 AM
Why is school so frickin expensive?
It's ridiculous.
0celo7 in 3 years: fuck I want to be in physics academia now.
Doubt it
He has never talked like that
that would have to be a pretty big shift
I don't want to be a professor
also haven't we established that I want to do something that will impact the real world
That's like what engineers do
So it seemed implicit
my experience with college: types to
2:28 AM
build multiverses with applied quantum gravity.
oops, backspace fail
if I could apply string theory to engineering, that would be pretty amazing
Aug 6 at 13:04, by 0celo7
@Danu I am curious if whatever I end up working on will be considered science
Aug 6 at 13:13, by Chris White
@0celo7 No, pure math is not science :P
> pure math
2:29 AM
I can't even into ZFC
like, chemistry?
most mathematicians can't even into addition
also, is pure math feasible outside of academia?
@0celo7 "hobo" is a life not inside academia, is it?
2:31 AM
I spent 10 years as a hobo
while my friends went to college
"avid recreationalist"
I still don't know if obe was trolling or not
which part
Don't think so. I think he was confused
2:33 AM
Impossible is nothing.
13 mins ago, by obe
tfw i realized 0celo7 is an engineer guy.
13 mins ago, by obe
i had the impression you were.
This dates to April.
what physics progress have you made since then
Add 3 months and it will be math stuff, qm, gr, qft.
2:39 AM
did you do the problem set
I feel bad.
just do the problem set, then stop feeling bad?
if I remain awake.
feel better
3:21 AM
Hey, look! Possible (probably?) new physics in the charged lepton sector!
2 hours later…
5:27 AM
@JohnDuffield No, you gave me a discovery.com reference. Pop articles are known for such sensationalistic twists of stuff said in journals
Q: Communication back in time?

Eben CowleyOn the wikipedia page for time travel, it mentions that Robert Forward said (theoretically, unknown since we don't have a working theory of quantum gravity) that if a heavy nucleus was subjected to an intense magnetic field, it would elongate into a Tipler cylinder and allow gamma rays to be sent...

The question asked for explanations of a possible method for creating Tipler cylinders
A: Communication back in time?

SlereahWhile there are probably a lot more problems with that statements, here are a few : A Tipler cylinder is infinitely long, hence it would require the nucleus to stretch infinitely far (and due to limitations on the speed of light, for eternity) before actually qualifying as one. I am not quite ...

This answer talks of it in the realms of mainstream physics
You just brush it off "time travel is science fiction"
My point is not "time travel is not science fiction", so please stop trying to straw man that
My point is that research of CTCs is mainstream. You're derailing an honest discussion about CTCs with "time travel is SF", which is completely not constructive
Your answer does much the same, it says "There can be no backward travel through time because there is no forward travel through time, because there is no motion through spacetime." -- a non sequitur. "No motion through spacetime" does not imply that time travel is impossible. Proven chronology protection mechanisms like CTC+vacuum fluctuation do.
Looking closer at your answer, it's not exactly non mainstream. Just not constructive. Sorry about that.
2 hours later…
7:29 AM
@ManishEarth : go and look at the book. You can see portions online. What I said is not a non-sequitur, it's physics. Now I'm sorry, but there is no tooth fairy, there is no Santa Claus, and there is no time travel either. Get used to it.
8:10 AM
@dmckee Did they finally build an electron detector
I wonder how easy it would be to make some muons at home
With some homebrew particle accelerator
@ManishEarth Probably don't bother
8:38 AM
Einstein never saw this Evidence :P
îs that a ballpit
2 hours later…
10:17 AM
NbCeIDnp 11

What if there are NO freeriders?
Could this extension to this research showed that freeriders, like cheaters in evolutionary settings are necessary?
There is no necessity in evolution
Just what happens
Cheating and freeloading is a valid strategy evolutionary-wise
And then methods against those also are
That social science arxiv paper reminds of this one, it seems the conclusions are similar
11:28 AM
@DavidZ I think it should only be deleted if the person it was directed at approves the deletion.
11:50 AM
@dmckee :O
more physics textbooks that will be out of date!
@Slereah ha
I think more accurately it will be "more bullshit matrices in the standard model"
It's gonna the weak-mixing and neutrino-mixing matrix all over again
idk how that stuff works
yay more stuff that I don't understand
It's like "oh no some weird effect in the SM"
"Let's put an extra term in by hand"
/am not interested enough in to look at
what about string theory
how will string theory have to be modified
Does string theory even do predictions
11:56 AM
people smarter than me say it does
12:08 PM
except those predictions are still too high in energy unreachable by current and near future accelerators
@Secret To be fair, that's almost an inevitable consequence for any theory "better" than QFT, since QFT describes the known energy regime with amazing accuracy.
right now IMO the only place where string theory research can possible shine are some of its maths have a lot in common with some condensed matter systems, and also the side reesearch that stems form researchign string theory, in analogy to how space research often end upwith technologies back here on earth
@ACuriousMind : But then there is the
not many predictions until the Planck scale
Yeah, that sucks.
Hopefully there's more interesting things in between
Like electroweak-strong unification!
12:19 PM
isn't that just Grand unified theory?
or is my memory mistaken?
Yes, that would be a GUT, but there's no "just" about that.
Is it so grand if there's no gravity :p
oops I forgto there are many types of GUT out there
Anyway what I noticed in the recent few months is that major popsci magazines such as sciencedaily, NewScientist and Scientific American have been reporting about a lot of quark and particle related researches

It unsuprisingly give me a feeling that a deeper understanding of the strong force and possible utilisation of it might be the next big thing
12:26 PM
Well it is always a thing
Strong force is complicated
just count about things happening in the past 2 months, pentaquark, quark gluon plasma from gold and proton collisions, possible signs of new physics involving the 3 generation of leptons
It's been studied for over 50 years
(off topic) Here's somethign interesting related to the recent issue of newscientist
breaking news, space is big
and people are always underestimate it
"The answer may surprise you."
stopped reading
Damn clickbait :V
I wonder if someone else could patiently and calmly interact with OP here so that he doesn't only have to deal with the evil mod that closed his question?
physics chat session today
on what topic
idk, I don't even know when
I got a notification
really vague
1:44 PM
@0celo7 You registered, remember?
@ACuriousMind you don't need to tell me that
I know I registered
but I still don't know what time :O
@Slereah No topic, it's the bi-weekly chat session at UTC 1600
if it's between chat session and the rock mineral group, I'll have to go with the rocks minerals
1:45 PM
what's the difference with every day chat session then
@Slereah Usually that TerryBollinger and JohnRennie come by :D
for those of us who nolife the chat, pretty much nothing
Otherwise, not much.
Who they
random people
welp, my 511keV question got killed
1:47 PM
the one about
killed by evil mods
::shakes fist:: I'm going to PO!
1:57 PM
@Qmechanic To my own surprise, it seems to have worked.

« first day (1783 days earlier)      last day (1710 days later) »