The h Bar

Obliv

21:03

@0celo7 I forgot my wallet at home. Lab in 1 hour and that'll take like 3 hours. Going to die.. help

Bernard Meurer

@Obliv Why do you need your wallet?

Obliv

I only ate two granola bars today (woke up at 12) @bernard

Bernard Meurer

@Obliv I only had dinner today :p

You'll be fine

Obliv

@bernard what did u have

Bernard Meurer

@Obliv Before dinner? Dinner yesterday. For diinner? Rice

Obliv

21:05

mm I could go for some before dinner right now.

@bernard how's your chemistry class

Bernard Meurer

@Obliv Still nuts

0celo7

@Obliv wtf why are you 3 hours from home

Obliv

@0celo7 the lab will take 3 hours. lern2reed

0celo7

Ah

heather

Any of you guys know python? (the coding language, I mean)

Obliv

21:10

@heather bernard is your guy.

heather

@Obliv, thanks for the recommendation. =)

@BernardMeurer, would you mind helping me with a strange error?

Bernard Meurer

@heather Which language, which OS?

heather

@BernardMeurer, Python 2, online compiler called repl.it, on a chromebook.

Bernard Meurer

I'm a Python 3 guy, but I should be able to help you :)

Can you share the code with me and explain your error?

heather

@BernardMeurer, it seems to be just the single line of code dnyet = input("Done with your circuit? y or n")

Bernard Meurer

21:13

raw_input

input is py3 only I believe

heather

@BernardMeurer, interestingly, that doesn't seem to be the problem. Mainly because 1. I had a previous line of code using input that worked normally, and 2. it gives me another error message when I run it using raw_input. I'll just double check it is that line and not something else real quick...

Bernard Meurer

@heather So, first lesson on asking for help with code: The error message is crucial

What's the error?

heather

@BernardMeurer, just double checked, and it worked, I just forgot to uncomment a different line of code, so a later line had an undefined variable - whoops. Thanks, though, can't believe I missed that.

Bernard Meurer

@heather It's a stupid mistake 80% of the time, don't worry :)

heather

@BernardMeurer, it's funny, I have this habit of crashing the compiler somehow =P

Like just now

Bernard Meurer

21:18

@heather If you're doing python it's an interpreter, not a compiler. Important distinction :)

@heather I have the habit of crashing the compiler AND the whole machine lol

heather

@BernardMeurer, good to know =) I have a habit of crashing the interpreter

Bernard Meurer

@heather programiz.com/article/difference-compiler-interpreter

Good overall description of the distinctions

Sir Cumference

Howdy

heather

@BernardMeurer, I skimmed it real quick, it makes sense - that's why it gives errors after, say, the raw_input, because it interprets it line by line.

@SirCumference, hello

Bernard Meurer

@heather Yes, exactly

Give that a good read, and then read some more. A good programmer understands compilers and interpreters well :)

@SirCumference Sup

Sir Cumference

21:23

@BernardMeurer Well this happened

Also still looking for someone who knows about degenerate gases

Bernard Meurer

@SirCumference Who signed it?

heather

@SirCumference, congrats on the signature

Bernard Meurer

@SirCumference HOLY SHIT

Sir Cumference

@BernardMeurer Says right there

Bernard Meurer

@SirCumference JUST SAW THAT

Awesome man! Sweet

Sir Cumference

21:25

@BernardMeurer Yeah :D

No idea how someone can sign for two hours tho

Bernard Meurer

@SirCumference It's called money

Sir Cumference

@BernardMeurer That's gotta be a lot of money

Also if you scroll down I asked him a GR question

Obliv

@sirC there is no way that spells Neil D. Tyson

Sir Cumference

@Obliv I think there's a D in the middle

Either that or an O with a dot in it

0celo7

what did he say?

Obliv

21:26

I don't think anyone will buy it because its illegible. For all we know you signed it yourself. nice try

0celo7

You should have asked him about logarithmic sobolev inequalities on spinorial function spaces

heather

@Obliv, hey, the poor guy's hand was tired. =P

Sir Cumference

19 hours ago, by Sir Cumference

Asked him and two other astrophysics professors with him if an event horizon could ever exist, since the apparent horizon would take an infinite amount of time to reach that point

Read from there and below

0celo7

@SirCumference Lol!

Sir Cumference

It'll explain the whole embarassment on my part...

0celo7

21:27

He only knows popscience

heather

@0celo7, wha...?

Sir Cumference

I was speaking into a microphone and there were hundreds of people

@0celo7 There were two general relativists next to him

0celo7

@heather NDT is a pop science person

Sir Cumference

I said below that the books Neil and them had written included some pretty deep stuff, like calc, explanations on tensors and worldlines, etc.

0celo7

He doesn't know anything advanced about his field...that's not what he's famous for

e.g. Hawking is truly a master of mathematical famous and became famous for his disease

Obliv

21:29

@heather don't listen to them.

heather

@0celo7, no I meant your sentence on logarithmic sobolev inequalities on spinorial space functions

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 But dude, the book they wrote

0celo7

NDT is a people person, he's not a real scientist

Obliv

Or specifically @obe and @0celo7

Sir Cumference

It had stuff like explanations on tensors and worldlines, formulae and differential equations, etc.

That's what they were selling and talking about

0celo7

21:29

@Obliv I'm being 100% serious. Find me a textbook that cites Tyson.

heather

@0celo7, he said pluto wasn't a planet :'(

Sir Cumference

@heather Mike Brown did it first

0celo7

@SirCumference Baby undergraduate physics.

Sir Cumference

And Pluto isn't a planet

0celo7

Who gives a shit what the planets are?

Sir Cumference

21:30

@0celo7 Prestigous much...

heather

@SirCumference (::shock::) but Pluto!

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Hundreds of thousands/millions of people in a field you have no interest in

0celo7

"planet" is a very arbitrary definition.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Not really

0celo7

proof?

Sir Cumference

21:31

The definition limits it to a few objects in the solar system with particularly high mass

Those are interesting

Obliv

@sirC I don't know why you expect someone who deals with questions like "does a black hole exist bcuz we cnt see it cuz lite cant ecscape from it?"to answer your question lol. Was he on a time constraint?

0celo7

Like your mother, sure.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 OH! SICK BURN!

GET SHREKED

0celo7

In any case, there are "science people" famous for being good at science, and people who are just "science people."

Sir Cumference

180 NO SCOPE

0celo7

21:32

NDT is in the second category.

Along with Bill Nye.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 It's a shame that people like Hubble, who revolutionized the entire field of astronomy, only get recognition in the field

heather

@BernardMeurer, well, the interpreter is no longer crashing

Sir Cumference

Yet people who haven't discovered anything like NDT get so famous

heather

but there's an error in my logic somewhere

0celo7

@SirCumference Pretty sure Hubble was a quack and stole someone's ideas. I'll have to check up on that.

heather

21:34

@0celo7, NDT?

Bernard Meurer

@heather This would be easier if I could see your code ;)

@heather Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Sir Cumference

@heather Neil deGrasse Tyson

what's wrong with me

Bernard Meurer

@SirCumference Nike Myson

0celo7

Mike would destroy him.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Uh, what?

Did he not observe redshifting and receding galaxies?

Bernard Meurer

21:35

@heather Not here, delete that. Let me show you how :)

0celo7

Ha!

Bernard Meurer

@heather Use this gist.github.com

heather

@BernardMeurer, create an account?

0celo7

@SirCumference He did, but there's some history there (looking it up)

Bernard Meurer

You shouldn't need to, but GitHub is very useful so you might as well

0celo7

21:36

> It is worth quoting from a letter from M. Way and H. N ̈ussbaumer to Physics Today, August 2011, p. 8. “It is widely held that in 1929 Edwin Hubble discovered the expanding universe and that his discovery was based on his extended observations of redshifts in spiral nebulae. Both statements are incorrect. . . . There is a great irony in these falsehoods still being promoted today.

> Hubble himself never came out in favor of an expanding universe; on the contrary, he doubted it to the end of his days.” I am among those who oppose the continual promotion of falsehoods in physics.

Obliv

@0celo7 NDT only has 1 publication afaik actually.. That's troubling

researchgate.net/publication/… I found his thesis

0celo7

@Obliv I'd like an apology from you.

> ndeed, there is some shady business for a budding historian of physics to look into and clarify. Since
Lemaˆıtre’s seminal 1927 paper was published in French in an obscure Belgian journal, Eddington arranged for it to be republished in English in 1931. But the two crucial pages containing Lemaˆıtre’s estimate of the so-called Hubble constant were omitted in the English translation. Smells rather fishy to say the least. Some reader should track down the person responsible for this omission.

> By the time I was finishing this book, a couple of years after I wrote the words above, I learned that M. Livio (Nature 479 (2011), p. 171, nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7372/full/479171a.html) had indeed tracked down the relevant documents and concluded that it was Lemaˆıtre himself who deleted the crucial pages. One of Livio’s conclusions was disputed by S. van der Bergh in a letter to the editor (Nature 480 (2011), p. 321).

> Based on what I read while writing this book and also my earlier popular book (An Old Man’s Toy), I feel that the kindest thing I can say about Hubble is that he went out of his way not to acknowledge the contributions of his contemporaries. I hope that Hubble’s status in cosmology will be reevaluated in the future.

@SirCumference Get fukt.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Who cares what Hubble thought?

heather

@BernardMeurer, here is the code

Sir Cumference

His discoveries led people like Lemaître to figure out that the Universe was indeed expanding

He set way for a huge field, whether he intended to or not

That's historical

0celo7

21:38

Did you not read the second part

Obliv

@sirC technically, you can't prove that the universe is actually 'expanding' it's just there are a lot of things that point towards that explanation

Bernard Meurer

@heather Very good :)

Sir Cumference

@Obliv No theory can be proven. Only disproven.

0celo7

He "went out of his way not to acknowledge the contributions of his contemporaries"

Scumbag

heather

@BernardMeurer, what is good? The creation of the github account or the code?

I sincerely doubt the latter

Sir Cumference

21:39

@0celo7 All right, you'll play that game. How about others like Jan Oort?

0celo7

You mean the cloud?

heather

Oort cloud, right?

@0celo7, beat me to the question

Obliv

@sirC you could prove that the universe is expanding. You just need sufficient evidence and a precise definition of expanding

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Came up with dark matter and (well, independently) the Oort cloud, and figured out where we are in the galaxy

Bernard Meurer

@heather Okay, do you want to learn some Python?

@heather That you're learning standard methods, that's what's good :)

heather

21:40

@BernardMeurer, sure!

Sir Cumference

@Obliv It's a basic principle that theories cannot be proven.

Only disproven.

Bernard Meurer

@ManishEarth You around?

Sir Cumference

Evidence may suggest expansion, but any underlining reason that we aren't aware of could the culprit

0celo7

Well what about him? I've never heard of him beyond his gas cloud.

heather

@0celo7 I feel very bad for Jan Oort right now. =)

Sir Cumference

21:42

@0celo7 He came up with dark matter, which is hugely influential in galaxy formation and is currently being vigorously researched?

> I've never heard of him beyond his gas cloud

That's exactly the point I was making

Bernard Meurer

@heather One second

Sir Cumference

10 mins ago, by Sir Cumference

@0celo7 It's a shame that people like Hubble, who revolutionized the entire field of astronomy, only get recognition in the field

I'll use Oort as an example now

Bernard Meurer

@heather Your code woks here

@0celo7 Check iMessage

heather

@BernardMeurer, it doesn't give syntax errors, but it should ask "what would you like your first gate to be" instead of going straight to "functionality not included"

Sir Cumference

This is one of the cringiest things I've read

Bernard Meurer

21:47

@heather Okay, first thing, variable naming

also, text editors

Is Chrome book linux?

heather

@BernardMeurer, okay...were they too undescriptive? The variable namse, I mean.

Obliv

@sirC You do not read cringy things then.

heather

Chromebook...um, I think they just run chrome, basically. There's no desktop or anything like that, just access to the internet.

Obliv

Oh boy if you've seen the things that I've seen..

Sir Cumference

@Obliv That's just so wrong...

And people think it's right

0celo7

21:48

@SirCumference maybe not a shame, just the way things are.

Bernard Meurer

@heather Not exaclty, but they had another problem: unreadable. Eg: qubits is a good name, dnyet could just be done

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Quite true... :(

heather

@BernardMeurer, okay, updated that, I'll change the github code

Obliv

@sirC uhh what's wrong with it? I'm pretty sure it hasn't been disproved that energy/matter is a fixed quantity throughout the universe.

DanielSank

What's this about python code?

I'm the python master.

0celo7

21:49

@SirCumference I wasn't arguing against that though

Sir Cumference

@Obliv Conservation of energy doesn't hold up in relativistic scales

0celo7

I was just saying NDT very likely does not know any GR

Sir Cumference

Not to mention "matter" is a very poorly defined term

Bernard Meurer

@DanielSank Shut up dawg

0celo7

Nonsense

heather

21:50

@DanielSank, I am trying to create a simple simulator of quantum circuits, and I am writing the basic code that takes in the necessary inputs, and there is a logic error.

0celo7

matter = fermions

Obliv

@SirCumference [citation needed]

DanielSank

@BernardMeurer You know it's true.

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 That's the definition I go by, but a lot of people don't

DanielSank

@heather Ah.

0celo7

21:50

- neutrinos perhaps

not sure if neutrinos are matter

DanielSank

Heather, can you perhaps post your code somewhere?

Sir Cumference

@Obliv We got something nice here

9

Q: Is the law of conservation of energy still valid?

Is the law of conservation of energy still valid or have there been experiments showing that energy could be created or lost?

Bernard Meurer

@DanielSank Yeah right, like that time you broke python for using if __name__ == '__main__' ?

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Depends how you define matter

heather

@DanielSank, indeed. I thought it would help me understand how quantum gates work and such by "explaining" it to the computer. The code can be seen here. It's pretty bad so far, I know.

Sir Cumference

21:52

@0celo7 Regardless, "fermions can neither be created nor destroyed" doesn't make much sense, especially when you consider annihilation

DanielSank

Hey @heather, let's use this shiny new room dedicated to your python quest: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/47539/python-with-heather

0celo7

@heather wtf you're a programmer too o.o

DanielSank

(Bernardo can come too)

Bernard Meurer

@DanielSank It was my idea you plankton

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Jesus... o_o

heather

21:52

@0celo7, well, learning to be a programmer. why the bug eyes?

Sir Cumference

@heather B-because, in middle school, we differentiated between opinions and facts...

ManishEarth

@BernardMeurer yes

Bernard Meurer

@ManishEarth Now it's too late, but thank you :)

0celo7

in middle school, I picked my nose

3

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 And here someone is programming and going to learn calc

What on Earth is even going on

In middle school I was like 11

Never have I met an 11 year old learning calc

heather

21:54

Well, um, I'm rather nerdy, I know. And think a little older than 11, more like the realm of early teenager-dom.

=P late middle school, next year highschool (!)

ACuriousMind

Like calculus, I have no idea what middle school even is :)

2

0celo7

You're not nerdy

Sir Cumference

Well still, 14 or so is pretty impressive to be finishing trig.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind grades 5-8

Sir Cumference

I finished it at 15

Obliv

21:55

@sirC literally the post under lubos argues his post. I don't know GR yet to blindly believe lubos.

@SirCumference I'm pretty sure it's meant to be defined as anything with 'mass' i.e interacts with the gravitational field.

Sir Cumference

@Obliv Here you go

bfy.tw/8Qbo

That's a pretty good source

Tons of citations too

Crap, screwed up

Obliv

wow thanks dude.

Sir Cumference

@Obliv Not to mention, laws aren't even absolute in physics

Bernard Meurer

@0celo7 Don't worry, in middle school I wasn't competent enough to be able to get my finger inside my nostril

Sir Cumference

As The Realm of the Nebulæ (Edwin Hubble) put it

> Beyond the limit of the observations, the form of [a] function, or relation, is speculative. For this reason, [a] law is empirical and it must remain empirical until it is explained by an accepted theory.

They're merely observations that seem to hold given the sample we have

0celo7

22:07

@BernardMeurer yo I have something for you to prove.

Bernard Meurer

@0celo7 No. Last time it was horrible

I failed badly

0celo7

22:37

But you've done more math since the

Bernard Meurer

22:57

@0celo7 No, I haven't

0celo7

23:11

@BernardMeurer you're taking a PhD level analysis class

Bernard Meurer

@0celo7 Taking $\neq$ Comprehending

user218912

hey

Transcript for