I vouch for the name The h Bar BQ
I like it because of the three "puns":
"h Bar" -> The Reduced Plank's constant.
"Bar BQ" -> A barbecue (we all know that a significant portion of the discussion in the Physics Chat room is related to food and cooking! )
"BQ" -> Bottom Quark!
Another major re...
@SirCumference Maybe. But at the same time I don't think many people understand the pun behind "The h Bar" also. If they want to know the meaning they will get to know it. :)
Also, I guess newcomers will be curious to know what BQ stands for.
The h bar is the obvious choice of name, and everyone with the remotest knowledge of physics should get the joke. None of the other proposed names have come close to the elegance and simplicity of the old name.
I quite like David's suggestion that name could be temporarily changed for fun then changed back a few days later. That allows us to play without causing any long term annoyance.
@JohnRennie I don't understand why there's such a kerfuffle. Since links to the room aren't invalidated when the name is changed, can't we just change it whenever we want, i.e. whenever one of the room owners decides to?
I'm surprised that the old link still works, but it does!
@DanielSank Well, some people might feel uncomfortable with a new name. Personally I would love to see the name being changed time to time, but then again some people don't like it.
@DanielSank A couple of people have expressed displeasure at the name change. I think they just consider it naff. Since I have no personal preference changing the name back seems a reasonable course.
@DanielSank The text at the end of the url is usually irrelevant on SE, that's also the case for questions and user profiles: It's the number after rooms/ that uniquely identifies the room, not the name.
Upvote this if you want the name changed back to the h bar.
Using my superpowers as a room owner I will change the name back if this gets ten upvotes (provided no competing suggestion gets more upvotes).
@DanielSank I think changing the name if and when someone suggests something witty seems a fun idea. Exactly how we decide on the names changes I'm not fussed.
I did in fact vote for Thatcher in 1979 when she first came to power, then again at the subsequent election. However I came to my senses after that :-)
In 1979 the UK was in a shocking state. Thatcher promised to bring order and indeed she did. But then she seemed to lose it and became something of a right wing lunatic.
Maybe after too long in power you lose your sense of perspective.
You don't need to wire it to the mains earth. Your body is sufficiently conducting that you can just hold the brush and the charge will leak to earth through you.
Digital audio is too easy, you can buy any CD, it doesn't matter, the bits are the same (assuming the mastering is the same). You can use a 9.99 CD player on your computer with some delta-sigma DAC and it's all good
Sure, get a $99 DAC and it's even better, but it's just easy :P
Records? Search through all the 78 pressings of that album you like, find the good ones, scramble the world for one in good shape, buy it from a guy in Vietnam, receive a brick instead, repeat
@BernardoMeurer I've got a Marantz CD player. I forget the exact model but it's a special edition and it sounds absolutely brilliant. Really, really, nice.
I'm not a mega hi-fi buff these days. I have an old hi-fi that sounds really good to my ears so I stick with that. Every time I've tried replacing a bit I've decided I don't like it as much and I've gone back to my old amp and speakers.
I use a Mac Mini running Kodi to play the FLACs with audio from the Mac's analogue port.
It's pretty good. It's better than any PC I've owned. I keep wondering about buying a Dragonfly USB DAC or something like that, but never got round to it.
@BernardoMeurer I think the price is justified as it has an internal computer which can recognize voice commands. It claims to have a good battery life as well.
There is a point of expansion where that certainly happens, but I don't see why the universe would need to even expand that far. What's wrong about a scenario where the universe expands a little - far too little for the phantom pressure to become dominant - then contracts again?
Phantom energy has $w\rho = p$ for $w < -1$ and density $\rho$ and pressure $p$, right? Why do you keep saying "as volume increases, its pressure becomes more negative"?
Anyway the point is that the equation of state determines how the pressure changes with volume. With a regular gas P is positive and decreases with volume. With dark energy P is negative and constant. With Big Rip stuff P is negative and becomes more negative with volume.
So a negative P makes the volume expand, but as the volume expands P gets even more negative, which makes the expansion even faster and we get a vicious cycle.
For ordinary matter, you can interpret this directly as a relation between volume and pressure, because the energy density of ordinary matter in a FLRW universe scales with $a^{-3}$, which is a volume factor.
But e.g. radiation scales with $a^{-4}$, it is both diluted and redshifted, so the change in energy density is not the same as the change in volume
Finally, phantom energy scales with some positive power of $a$, meaning it gets denser as the universe expands more quickly.
Because of its equation of state, it getting denser means it exerting more negative pressure
But I find talking about "volume" here confusing because in FLRW universes the energy density does not scale with volume except for non-relativistic ordinary matter.
(I also find it confusing to think about stuff that gets denser as the universe expands in the first place; I guess that's why I'm not a cosmologer ;P )