The h Bar

Anonymous

13:00

@ACuriousMind Physicists do not have time to solve UG level / competitive problems...that is the problem we face at Physics Se

Anonymous

No...there won't be any drainage

ACuriousMind

SE will not launch a new site where the group of experts is entirely a subset of an already existing site

heather

@ACuriousMind, wait, I'm confused. There are two math sites. There are multiple sites who might say their expert is programmers. There are two sites that include astronomy in the scope.

ACuriousMind

(Again, the math.SE/MO split is very special and exists for convoluted historical reasons)

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind Do you know that most users of Math Overflow also have a Math SE account? Users overlap but aims dont

Anonymous

13:02

@ACuriousMind This is a special case too

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind there are atleast 5 programming sites on SE

ACuriousMind

@heather math.SE/MO is historical, and MO wasn't launched by SE itself. The multiple programmers sites (I assume you mean the trilogy sites SO,SU,SF and Software Engineering are there because each of them has almost overwhelmingly large traffic. Trying to funnel all those questions through a single site would be disaster

Anonymous

All the users overlap with Stack overflow

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind what about the 5 programming sites

Anonymous

they all overlap in user base

Anonymous

13:03

but the aims differ

ACuriousMind

Software Engineering (former programmers) has fought for years against being the site where "questions off-topic at SO" go to ~~die~~ live a happy life

@S007 What "five programming sites"?

I just discussed the trilogy and SoftEng

heather

@ACuriousMind, there's still the astronomy overlap. User base overlap is all over the place.

And yes, I know you said there was fighting against astronomy, but it got passed.

Anonymous

computer science, theoretical computer science, computational science all overlap

Anonymous

with SO

Anonymous

but still they are different

Anonymous

13:05

@ACuriousMind

heather

yes, there is another user base overlap.

ACuriousMind

@heather A bit of overlap is fine. astronomy.SE successfully argued that the typical astronomer has a different workflow and different needs from the typical physicist, that is, most astronomers actually care very little about other physics, and most physicists don't have the slightest clue about astronomy

heather

@ACuriousMind, I might also point out that there are multiple sites with Christianity as their main focus.

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind Similarly professional physicists do not care about UG level problem solving...that's the problem...do you get it ? Students and teachers at that level are more concerned about problem solving

heather

I would just have to say that while there is a bit of user overlap in this case, the difference is enough to make it its own site.

ACuriousMind

13:07

@S007 No, they don't. SO is about programming. cs.SE is about the academical field of computer science, tcs.SE is about the academic field of theoretical computer science, which is often closer to math than to computer science, and computational science is about numerical methods in all the sciences.

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind I am talking about the user base...the users overlap

heather

data science and computational science have a bit of overlap too

Anonymous

but the aims are different

Anonymous

there is nothing like drain of users

Anonymous

we are giving more choice

ACuriousMind

13:08

@S007 Not the "aims". The scope is different, they are about different topics

heather

right

Anonymous

@ACuriousMind yep

ACuriousMind

"Physics exercises" is not a topic, it's a specific kind of question about physics.

That's the problem right there: Your topic is a full subset of the topic of physics.SE

Anonymous

Physics Problem Solving is a topic...like Brilliant.org is completely dedicated to problem solving

heather

@ACuriousMind, our scope is different than physics.SE's scope. yes, we might have user base overlap but I don't think that prevents it from being a site. Then, I'd say that physics problem solving is definitely a topic - how to solve various problems in physics!

Anonymous

13:10

Brilliant.org doesn't answer theoretical questions

Anonymous

but they excel in problem solving

Anonymous

that is the type of site we aim at

Anonymous

just our model is different

Anonymous

but our scope is same as brilliant.org

Anonymous

have a look at the site

Anonymous

13:11

yes..just now

heather

@ACuriousMind, the connection between physics and physics problem solving in my mind would be like the connection between computer science and theoretical computer science - more conceptual stuff is sent to physics and practical problems, involving calculations and how to solve problems, is sent to physics problem solving.

ACuriousMind

@heather So far, the distinction between physics.SE and your proposal is the kind of question allowed, but not the topic of the question. The topics of your questions would be classical mechanics, electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, etc., all of which are on-topic at physics.SE.

heather

@ACuriousMind, the kind of question is just as important as the topic in difference, I think. My analogy with computer science and theoretical computer science would apply here, I believe.

@S007, did you email Robert?

Anonymous

yes i did

Anonymous

just now

Secret

13:13

@ACuriousMind We knew the HUP stems from the noncommutativity of observables, but other than the scaling property of fourier transform (which result in the fourier transform of a narrow function to be spread out int fourier space), is there a more fundamental (math) reason why some noncommuting continuous observables (such as x vs p) are related by a fourier transform?

Anonymous

hope he replies

heather

@S007, yes, I hope so as well

ACuriousMind

@heather Again, you need to look at the scope of the sites you're citing. tcs.SE is explicitly research level in its scope, so all undergraduate topics should, in prinicple, go to cs.SE. physics.SE has no such restriction (undergraduate level questions are perfectly fine).

0celo7

@Secret Cauchy-Schwarz inequality

heather

@ACuriousMind, our scope is explicitly problems!

Anonymous

13:14

@ACuriousMind we are talking about different types of questions..and not topics ....see my example of brilliant.org

Anonymous

Brilliant.org doesn't answer theoretical questions
but they excel in problem solving
that is the type of site we aim at
just our model is different
but our scope is same as brilliant.org
have a look at the site

ACuriousMind

@Secret For x and p, it's Stone-von Neumann: x and p are basically multiplication and differentiation, and the Fourier transform does relate differentation and multplication with each other.

Secret

I see

ACuriousMind

@heather Okay, we have a word problem here: "Scope" means "range of topics the site will cover". A topic is, well, a subfield one can know something about (network architecture, physics, classical mechanics, linguistics, etc.). Within its scope, each site then typically disallows certain kinds of questions (recommendations, "What is best?"-type questions, homework questions).

But this latter process is something that happens after the site has been launched, this is what all the meta discussions on a new beta sites will typically revolve around.

In particular, SE does not consider these policies fixed, that is, part of the site's scope.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Umm. If you try to do HUP with Fourier transforms you run into problems with integrating by parts. Have you figured out a way around this?

DHMO

13:19

Why is it stated on my book that reflection and refraction are properties of waves while diffraction and interference are unique properties of waves?

ACuriousMind

In the case of MO and math.SE, or tcs.SE and cs.SE, tcs and MO are not different by "not allowing exercise questions", but by their scope being research-level mathematics/computer science in contrast to undergraduate level mathematics/computer science

@0celo7 I don't know what you mean. Showing the HUP for Gaussians is a perfectly standard exercise (also in signal processing etc.)

Andras Deak

@DHMO I think you can explain reflection and refraction with a corpuscular theory of light

heather

@ACuriousMind, why can the difference between physics and physics problem solving not be allowing exercises vs not? That seems like a rather dramatic difference, especially knowing the physics.SE attitude towards homework questions.

Andras Deak

(but there's something that dispersion would be the other way around in this case? Vague memories)

DHMO

@AndrasDeak what about diffraction and interference?

0celo7

13:21

@ACuriousMind Yes, and I did it in high school. But in general, you're not gonna make it work

Andras Deak

@DHMO most certainly not:)

0celo7

The real magic is just Cauchy-Schwarz.

DHMO

@AndrasDeak light can't choose when to behave as a wave and when to behave as a particle right

I am told that they are both at every time

Andras Deak

@DHMO light doesn't choose

the particle-wave duality in my opinion is about humans' weak grasp on reality

DHMO

then what are the particles doing in diffraction?

Andras Deak

13:22

@DHMO what are the waves doing in ~~absorption~~ photoemission?

DHMO

@AndrasDeak no idea

Andras Deak

yup

DHMO

???

Secret

My current favorite interpretation being a type of $\psi$-ontic and that quantum objects are linear neither particle nor wave objects

heather

@S007, I just noticed this post.

Andras Deak

13:24

my point is that light is light, and depending on how you look at it it can behave as something that resembles stones that you can throw, or something that is like ripples on a pond (just to stick with notions we picked up during evolution)

DHMO

alright

Andras Deak

my rule of thumb is "light tends to propagate as waves and it tends to interact as particles", but I'm absolutely sure that the regulars here can give a much better and more complete description of the problem

there's also extensive literature on the subject that I'm unfamiliar with

I just find it hard to shut up, is all:)

Secret

http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/33198558#33198558
the same idea that a time dependent metric is just proper distance changing without anything physically stretching nor moving apart at all

Andras Deak

@Secret okay?

DHMO

@Secret now what is a proper distance?

Secret

13:27

Btw, In experimental settings, I generally treat light as wavelike, until it start interacting like billard balls

@DHMO spacelike separation between two events as measured by an observer in their rest frame, or the separation between two comoving events, if I recall

DHMO

@Secret alright

Secret

Most of the time, light interact like a wave when alone, unlike electrons

which is more fuzzy

Andras Deak

"most of the time" $^{[\text{citation needed}]}$

Secret

But otherwise, I have not learn enough QED to said anything more about how light is described as a quantum object

0celo7

13:43

wth was that

Andras Deak

:D

I'd say paranormal activity, but this is not that kind of room

0celo7

no, I had a message typed into the chat box when I opened my laptop o.o

heather

@EmilioPisanty, what site did you use to create your community adds?

0celo7

@EmilioPisanty I wanted to tell you something apparently

Emilio Pisanty

@0celo7 which was?

Andras Deak

13:44

@0celo7 that sometimes happens to me, but my previous message stays in the editbox...

0celo7

No clue!

Andras Deak

not the case now, apparently

Emilio Pisanty

@heather what do you mean?

heather

@EmilioPisanty, how did you create the community ads? I assume you didn't draw them and upload them ;)

Emilio Pisanty

@heather well, there's a lot of them

heather

13:45

@EmilioPisanty, what tools did you use to make them?

Emilio Pisanty

just about all of this year's crop was done on Inkscape

heather

Inkscape...okay

Emilio Pisanty

see the comments below each ad for more info

where there's an inkscape source it's linked to in a comment

heather

okay, thank you

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Crap!

It ended up next to Sachs and Wu again :(

heather

13:47

Hawking Ellis...=)

0celo7

the real GR book

@heather you've decided on this one, right?

heather

@0celo7, indeed

And I'm hoping I get all the books on my list =P

0celo7

My copy is well-worn

Andras Deak

The name of A. Zee reminds me of the book by Alpher, Bethe and Gamow...

0celo7

I should try to reread it one of these days, but 900 pages is a bit daunting

Andras Deak

13:51

(or was it just a paper?)

heather

@AndrasDeak, just a paper

Andras Deak

thanks

makes more sense that way, but when I heard about it long ago, it seemed to be a book:)

0celo7

@heather so when are we reading Zee?

heather

@0celo7, hmm, I don't know. Depends on whether or not I get it. If I don't, I do have an Amazon gift card, I think, so I might get it with that.

0celo7

you need calc 3 first

heather

14:00

@0celo7, will Apostol I and II prepare me appropriately?

0celo7

I don't know calculus books

heather

I believe II is multivariable calculus

0celo7

@JohnRennie Hi

John Rennie

@0celo7 Afternoon/morning

heather

@JohnRennie, our proposal got closed as a duplicate. S007 emailed Robert.

0celo7

14:06

@JohnRennie It's 10

I should probably get some food...

Hopelessly stuck on analysis homework

Andras Deak

what kind of analysis?

0celo7

Functional, but not really functional

$$\left|\inf_{\delta>0}\sup_{y,z\in I_\delta(x)}{|f(y)-f(z)|}-\inf_{\eta>0}\sup_{w,v\in I_\eta(x)}{|g(w)-g(v)|}\right|.$$

I need that $\le 2\epsilon$ if $||f-g||\le\epsilon$ (sup norm)

Andras Deak

okay:D thanks:)

OK, took me a while, but at least I parsed the question

Anonymous

@heather can you send a mail too ?

Anonymous

I still didnt get a reply

Anonymous

14:21

I think some more people need to mail Robert

heather

@S007, sure, yeah. One moment

Anonymous

[email protected]

Andras Deak

Isn't that harrassment?

are you sure that's called-for?

Anonymous

Why? Robert just closed it without any good reason

Anonymous

Not expected from a Stack Exchange moderator

Andras Deak

14:24

@S007 that could probably be argued. But you're right that it should be discussed. And I'm sure he will respond in a timely manner. I suspect that additional e-mails won't speed up the process, but piss him off (and he'd be right)

Anonymous

No. I think if just one person mails him he might not take it seriously. We need to explain that why is the new site different

Andras Deak

Many would argue that already one e-mail outside the network channels is inappropriate.

[citation needed]

heather

@AndrasDeak, please believe me when I say I wrote it as politely as I could. "If you don't mind, I like to understand further why it was closed, so I can help to fix the proposal." was one line. I just want to establish that I'm not some crank.

Anonymous

that is his network email only

Andras Deak

You're all free to do as you wish, I'm just urging caution based on my extensive experience with Stack Overflow:)

Anonymous

14:26

:/

heather

@AndrasDeak, I understand, and I have to thank you for your advice. =)

Andras Deak

I'm explicitly unaware of the customs on other SE sites.

heather

Hey, does anyone know the name of the font used on Area 51?

Andras Deak

which part?

inspector says "arial" and "impact" so far

heather

the fonts like in this

Anonymous

14:31

I changed the site description to "Proposed Q&A site for problem solving techniques in Physics at the High School,Undergraduate or Graduate level."

Anonymous

Does that seem right?

heather

@S007, add something in there about physics enthusiasts

otherwise, yes, I think that's a good move

Anonymous

I think the word "level" does the job... we are not concerned with who is posting the question

heather

Yeah, that's true. Okay, that makes sense, and it is clearer now what the purpose of the site is, I think.

@S007, you know, I wonder if Robert misunderstood the purpose of the site. Because it could've just seemed like an exact copy of physics to him.

Anonymous

@heather Maybe, I hope he sees our email !

heather

14:34

@S007, he will. He's busy, it takes time.

I bet you tomorrow we'll have a response for sure.

Anonymous

Alright...thanks for so much effort you took! I hope our effort doesn't go in vain :-) Cya

heather

Yep, see you around

Andras Deak

bye

DHMO

14:52

If light is an EM wave then why isn't it affected by E-field and M-field (b-field)?

Andras Deak

Why would it be?

Maxwell's equations are linear, so as long as those hold, you can superimpose EM fields without them knowing about each other.

DHMO

@AndrasDeak I am a layman

Andras Deak

then that's why -------------------------------------^ ;)

DHMO

Could you phrase it so that I understand?

Andras Deak

if field (E1,B1) solves Maxwell's equations (so it's physical), and (E2,B2) solves it, then (E1+E2,B1+B2) solves it

DHMO

14:54

that's very layman...

Andras Deak

i.e. you can cross rays of light and they will pass through each other, they can't interact

side note: I don't think light sabers could work in any reasonable universe:P

DHMO

What does it mean that light is oscillation in E-field and b-field?

Andras Deak

Exactly that. That there are solutions to Maxwell's equations that are propagating waves made up of both E and B fields propagating together. As it happens, light is an example of such waves

so are radio waves and X-rays

DHMO

can you not mention Maxwell's equations?

Andras Deak

not really:D

DHMO

14:57

what does E field mean?

Andras Deak

haha, yes

DHMO

??

Andras Deak

I hope the regulars can point you to some basic reading on electromagnetism:) I'm not familiar with sources for laymen. I also have to go to try and break my laptop, so see you later

DHMO

how does any change of E-field matter if there is no charge?

Andras Deak

@DHMO static (constant-in-time) E fields only affect charges, but time-dependent E fields are related to B fields and vice versa. That's exactly what Maxwell's equations are about.

DHMO

15:00

@AndrasDeak how does any change of B field matter if there is no charge?

Andras Deak

@DHMO see the above -----------------------------------------------------------------^

DHMO

I mean, how does light affect anything at all?

Andras Deak

@DHMO that's a pretty rough question:)

generally, you see it interacting with electrons in various forms of matter

DHMO

oh, so you do need a charge

Andras Deak

@DHMO to detect it, yes. For light to exist, no

DHMO

15:01

@AndrasDeak sure

Andras Deak

most of the universe is full of EM radiation, and no charge

DHMO

now, when a magnetic field is induced, and a light passes through that field, what happens?

Andras Deak

anyway, gotta go right now, good luck

9 mins ago, by Andras Deak

Maxwell's equations are linear, so as long as those hold, you can superimpose EM fields without them knowing about each other.

DHMO

but wouldn't the superimposed fields look like the light shifted?

Andras Deak

no

DHMO

15:04

what would it look like?

Andras Deak

bye

Sanya

15:32

@DHMO normally, nothing should happen - the light passes through the area and in that area, there is a magnetic field

heather

@S007, tell me what you think of this "first draft" of the community ad:

oh, wait, that should be 4 followers...whoops.

DHMO

15:52

@Sanya but what would the superimposed field look like?

Sanya

@DHMO what do you mean?

DHMO

@Sanya when the B-field superimposes with the B-field of the light

Sanya

you take the magnetic field $\vec{B}$ and you add the light field $\vec{B}_{light}$

and this sum is the total field

DHMO

uh, sure, but what would it look like?

0celo7

@Sanya uh, proof? Why isn't there an interaction term

Sanya

16:02

@0celo7 proof -> Maxwell equations

why should there be an interaction term?

@DHMO I confess that I do not understand your question

DHMO

two superimposed fields:

0celo7

@Sanya proof of those?

Anonymous

@heather Please take part in the commenting with robert

Anonymous

@heather Will "mathematical physics" be a better name ?

Anonymous

I like the ad btw

Sanya

16:16

@0celo7 those are axiomatic

@DHMO I'm not going to draw you field lines, if that's what you mean :o

DHMO

@Sanya alright

Secret

16:30

http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/33200143#33200143
Actually, I might need to check whether this is a good way to motivate the lorentz force, cause the only place I found this pics is some random website that does physics assignments

user228700

@DHMO: \o

DHMO

@Kaumudi hi

DHMO

16:47

When light enters a new medium, some of it is refracted and some of it is reflected

is it probabilistic?

Anonymous

17:00

@heather I think Robert isn't gonna listen. Maybe we have to wait until Physics SE changes some of its policies. Anyway I respect his opinion.

heather

17:12

@S007, I don't know about mathematical physics - I'd keep it the way it is. I will comment now, I had to go do some stuff.

DanielSank

17:37

What's up, everybody?

0celo7

@DanielSank What should I do math-wise

DanielSank

@0celo7 Too broad

0celo7

@DanielSank Should I learn about covering spaces and then read Wolf, or learn about Lp spaces and then read Li?

Secret

what maths have you done so far (list)?

Mike Miller

don't you know both of those

DanielSank

17:43

@0celo7 I don't know.

0celo7

@MikeMiller Somewhat

@Secret addition, subtraction, multiplication, division

counting I guess

Secret

shouldn't be just that, given your diverse GR background.

0celo7

@MikeMiller I should just work through Wolf. But he said "by a standard connectivity argument" in some covering space proof and I had no clue what he meant

So I figured I'd review covering spaces

Secret

But anyway, if you really have a lot of free time, (for the algebraic side) some group theory is a good thing, (for the analysis side) topology and Lp spaces

0celo7

I don't know any topology, seems scary

Physics Guy

17:46

I can count to 10. Just learned it today.

0celo7

don't do it here!

there are children

Physics Guy

@Ocelo7 What ? You are learning about covering spaces ?

Secret

Munkres should be a good starting point. Munkres also beef you up enough in PHD set theory

Mike Miller

@0celo7 He's presumably showing that some set is both open and closed and nonempty.

Secret

also covering space is a topological notion

0celo7

17:47

@MikeMiller Agreed, I'll take another look at it

Secret

It is very helpful though, e.g. it helps you to understand why spin behave the way it behaves

0celo7

I think he was showing that a function is continuous on a clopen set that contained the basepoint or something

Mike Miller

what was the theorem

0celo7

Covering Homotopy.

Mike Miller

I don't know what you mean. That there exists a lift of every homotopy of functions given that the original function has a lift?

0celo7

17:50

Yeah

I think it's called Covering Homotopy Thm in Hatcher

Mike Miller

I don't know the names, just what they do. Your proposed proof sounds fine.

DanielSank

@S007 That question we discussed yesterday... is there an error in the part computing the distance between the ring elements?

link

Secret

@KyleKanos, I understand what you are trying to say. But then how would you suggest I ask the above question in this forum... This is the only forum that answers physics doubts to my knowledge (I am a high school student... and I believe you can see that from my question)... you may edit the question to your likings (no objections) but at least keep the material of the question similar.... also could you give me an answer to the above in comments??? — Abhishek Bakshi Apr 9 at 14:05

[Rant]=this is not a forum FFS

0celo7

Lol, PSE forum confirmed

Secret

(NB crazy emotion because a few minutes ago that crazy annoying EM friend of mine have almost caused an unrelated user on a fb goup to think I am a sockpuppet of his due to his constant pings AND the pings in the wrong order)

Physics Guy

18:07

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11

I make progress....

Secret

try count to $\omega_1$ >: D

0celo7

Please. I counted to $\aleph_1$ while bored one day

Physics Guy

No set theory, please

Secret

Actually, you cannot count to $\omega_1$, in fact, it is not mathematically allowed, lol

Physics Guy

@Ocelo7 By the way, you seem to evade my question why your blog is called "Einstein and the Evidence". What does this "evidence" stand for ?

0celo7

18:14

Sorry, I cannot tell you.

There's some bad history there

It's not a topic we wish to bring up in here again

Physics Guy

Oh come on...

0celo7

No, it is too painful

Physics Guy

......

It's okay.

0celo7

chat.stackexchange.com/…

that is all I will say

Physics Guy

Well, everyone knows that he's an.....

0celo7

18:23

A very nice guy, yes

Physics Meta

19:09

0

Q: Is this what we intended for a resource recommendation?

Let's ignore all the other things that I find wrong with this question for the moment: Is there a tool online that lets me convert acceleration-time graphs into velocity-time and position-time graphs? I was surprised to see the resource-recommendation appear on it, given that it's more of a sof...

DanielSank

Hi, everybody.

Andras Deak

hey

heather

@DanielSank, hello!

heather

21:16

@S007, what do you think we should do to get the proposal reopened?

user218912

what are you doing?

heather

@obe, see this proposal

worthy of reopening

user218912

I don't think so.

user218912

stackexchange isn't a homework help site, and that's what problem solving basically is.

user218912

and you can just ask it on physics se.

Sanya

21:23

@obe and get it closed

user218912

xD

Sanya

and math SE is just problem solving

so the argument that SE doesn't work like that is bogus

the only thing I see is the closing moderator being ignorant of physics SE

heather

thank you, @Sanya, my frustrations exactly

besides, @obe, it isn't a homework help site per se, it is more of a way for students and enthusiasts to get assistance with problems and how to solve them. We would expect work to be shown.

user218912

but like

user218912

you can just modify physics se to accept homework-like questions.

user218912

21:25

no need for a new site

Sanya

@obe will never happen; should not happen

user218912

why?

Sanya

because it scares big parts of the community away and there will be an influx of questions that are not interesting for the audience

by the way, math has two SEs too

so ....

user218912

oh yeah I forgot about that

user218912

hmmm

Sanya

21:28

I don't see why math gets that but physics not

user218912

so how about we re-open theoretical physics se.

user218912

and take homework questions here

Sanya

especially if the request comes overwhelmingly from the community

heather

@obe, erm...theoretical physics would be like the worst place for homework

Sanya

well, theoretical physics is not what physics SE is only about

at least in theory

user218912

21:29

@heather I said in physics se.

Sanya

but in general, why reactivating an old SE, migrating all the users to that one and then using an existing one

when you could just open a new one

user218912

that's not what I meant

Sanya

then what do you mean?

user218912

re-open it as in make a new one based off the same logic as the one that got closed.

user218912

so physics se for higher level physics.

Sanya

21:39

yeah well, that's the intention already

isn't it?

user218912

I thought you wanted to create a physics homework se

Sanya

yeah

rob

Hello, all.

Sanya

well, homework ... maybe we shouldn't call it like that

maybe "physics for non-research level"

rob

I'm confused about the goal of the proposed "physics problem-solving" site. Would anyone help me clarify?

Sanya

21:45

@rob to me it would be a place where we could move all questions that at the moment get closed as homework

rob

@Sanya all of them?

Sanya

@rob well ... all of them, I don't say they would all be allowed there

Andras Deak

I assume the network-wide norm of "don't migrate crap" would apply;)

Sanya

but that would have to be a community-driven policy-finding process

@AndrasDeak then why do the mathematicians always migrate crap here ... :|

Andras Deak

you should ask them... why don't you have a version of this for users of math.SE?

maybe that would help

or is it on-topic crap?

Sanya

21:48

@AndrasDeak I was joking ;) there are crap questions that get migrated, but it's a rather small extent

Andras Deak

Ah, I wouldn't know:)

Sanya

but if it becomes overwhelming, that would be a very good idea :)

sorry

Andras Deak

and mathematicians not giving a crap would fit in well with my picture of mathematicians:D

rob

Are there examples of questions that have been closed here that would be a good fit for the "problem-solving" site?

Andras Deak

@rob hmm, those would also help a lot in pinning down the scope of the new site, great point

Sanya

21:52

@rob I think there are some linked in the area 51 proposal, but I can't provide you with any myself (as I am not officially a head behind that new site thing)

@AndrasDeak actually, most of them are very kind and caring people I have found

Andras Deak

@Sanya if you have nice shoes

and I mean this :D

Sanya

@AndrasDeak O_O"

XD

Andras Deak

22:16

Is the site's logo supposed to look like a paper ship?

DanielSank

22:57

@AndrasDeak It's a Mexican hat.

Spontaneous symmetry breaking

Spontaneous symmetry breaking is a mode of realization of symmetry breaking in a physical system, where the underlying laws are invariant under a symmetry transformation, but the system as a whole changes under such transformations, in contrast to explicit symmetry breaking. It is a spontaneous process by which a system in a symmetrical state ends up in an asymmetrical state. It thus describes systems where the equations of motion or the Lagrangian obey certain symmetries, but the lowest-energy solutions do not exhibit that symmetry. Consider a symmetrical upward dome with a trough circling the...

Transcript for