« first day (2390 days earlier)      last day (2836 days later) » 

13:01
angst is only interesting once you poke a hole in the fabric of reality with it
Angst is only interesting when you do something productive with it
breaking reality is productive
user228700
Perhaps your brain is attune to that and perhaps it so happens that u haven't yet considered it in all its miserable splendor. In any case, that (the one in this book) angst slowly manifests itself as existential crises later on for those of us not prone to that sort of thing. I agree that in and of itself, angst is never interesting but the book is, after all, a coming of age book and Salinger has worked with it well.
angst is only just one aspect of existentialism.
user228700
@BalarkaSen angst would be a very initial stage...
13:10
That is also not true. Usually teen angst has little or nothing to do with existentialism. Many many existential philosophers wrote tomes on angst from the perspective of free moral choice and existential despair.
To me it's the least interesting aspect.
I think you're confusing existential angst with psychological angst. Everyone goes through the latter in one way or another in life.
user228700
@BalarkaSen I agree. Even when speaking of Holden, existential angst is what I was referring to...
user228700
I don't know if I know/remember what the other one feels like.
I should read Catchers in the Rye at some point.
user228700
You should. It will be interesting to know if u despise the guy or have some sympathy for him.
maybe not today. I'll note it down somewhere in my imaginary reading list
have you read anything by Edgar A Poe?
13:23
Deep purple=I have sufficiently solid knowledge on shaded
Pale purple: I have at least heard of it, and depending on the nature of the question, can source relevant resources to answer it despite not fully understood to formulate a solution
Completion of The Plan requires turning all of them into deep purple
Only then will the following be possible:
$$\mathbf{FABRICATED WORLD}\cap \mathbf{REALITY}\neq \emptyset$$
(Actually a small correction: I don't know every single thing about linear algebra)
Linear Algebra is the best maths
It's a really high density of magic per character
i like linear algebra man
It is, I also think a lot quicker whenever the subject is converted into matrices. This mindset helps me to be more comfortable with arrays in programming
Current progress
Final hurdle is daily routine and independence, once that is overcame, expansion is expected to be very rapid
One of my near future goals in maths is to turn ordinals into deep purple, because I really like infinities
(still working on that, though)
14:03
@BernardoMeurer I use IBM OS/360. With punched cards. That's old :-)
@Kaumudi.H actually it does :-)
user228700
...I hope so but as Balarka said, it was the existentialist sort of angst that I was referring to and that, well, I don't know if that will.
user228700
Regarding the other sort, again, like I said, I don't know if I know/remember what that feels like.
Trust me, when you get middle aged all you care about is your joints :-)
user228700
I'd bet you a wholesome lunch that I will feel similarly on this one when I am middle-aged but, erm...
... I'll be dead by then :-)
Which is one way of getting rid of existential angst!
user228700
14:10
I didn't want to say it but yes :-/ I mean, maybe not! But you'd be too old to humor me anyway :-P
user228700
On second thought though, I'm not too sure if I will feel similarly. There has never been any angst for me, but crises, heck yes; once every few months. Maybe that'll go away and maybe not...
I think most crises have to do with worries about the future, and there comes a point where the future seems pretty settled. So the crises stop.
why did someone star my saying "nope"?
user228700
@JohnRennie Hmm, perhaps. When they arrive, my destructive thinking patterns usually have very little to do with myself (and my future) though so I'm not too sure.
user228700
@heather x'D God only knows why.
14:18
Well the immediate future looks good anyway ...
A good movie about what happens when you get old is The Fly.
and i mean the 1986 one
@BalarkaSen I'm going to turn into Jeff Goldblum when I get old(er)!!!!??
@JohnRennie Brundlefly doesn't look like Jeff Goldblum
Is that where he turns into a half-human fly?
14:30
yeah. well he's a half-human fly in 60% of the movie so
The Fly is a 1986 American science fiction horror film directed and co-written by David Cronenberg. Produced by Brooksfilms and distributed by 20th Century Fox, the film stars Jeff Goldblum, Geena Davis and John Getz. Loosely based on George Langelaan's 1957 short story of the same name, the film tells of an eccentric scientist who, after one of his experiments goes wrong, slowly turns into a fly-hybrid creature. The score was composed by Howard Shore and the make-up effects were created by Chris Walas, along with makeup artist Stephan Dupuis. The film was released on August 15, 1986 to massive...
In the original a kid crushes his half-fly counterpart at the end.
(Sorry for the spoiler)
user228700
@JohnRennie Dammit. Good food :'-(
the 58(?) one? i haven't seen that
@Kaumudi.H Vegetarian too! Cheese and onion pasties.
user228700
14:34
No. SHUSH.
user228700
The old rule applies :'-(
@Kaumudi.H Ah, I had forgotten. Grandma's cooking!
user228700
Yes :'-(
Actually that sounds like someone is cooking Grandma
Great flick if you like black and white movies @BalarkaSen
14:37
@user314159 I saw it as a child, which was a long time ago. As I recall the fly has a (tiny) human head and is screaming help me.
user228700
@JohnRennie Oh God, yes x'D
@Kaumudi.H I hope that's not the case - she'd be a bit tough.
user228700
:-P No, no. Grandma's alive and dandy.
Yup, while being attacked by spider trapped in its web @JohnRennie
Ah yes. That's pretty damn scary when you're young.
14:40
It was a mercy killing.
I would've done the same.
@Kaumudi.H: shall I post a picture of my dessert?
Please :-)
one of the scariest black and white films i watched is from '32, "Freaks"
Yup, that^ is a good one too.
user228700
@JohnRennie I will kill you.
14:44
@Kaumudi.H :-)
I won't even tell you what it is - if you pay me! :-)
user228700
@JohnRennie Thanks :-P So much.
Actually it's a very typical English dessert so you may not like it anyway.
user228700
It's OK. Don't :-P
gibble gobble gibble gobble
Weird blackhole question: Consider a schwartzchild blackhole with an infalling astronaut. From GR we can calculate when the astronaut is expected to cross the event horizon in his rest frame. Now the lab frame is provided by a spaceship positioned at fixed distance r from the blackhole's event horizon which corresponds to the schwartzchild radius.

Now since we knew when the astronaut is expected to hit the schwartzchild radius as seen in the lab (hence the event horizon) given the initial condition of the free falling astronaut, suppose the ship decides to accelerate briefly towards the bl
14:51
@BalarkaSen If you like Edgar A Poe, the movie based on The Pit and the pendulum is worth looking at.
I think there are multiple movies based on that? Which one is it that you speak of?
i have heard of the one by Roger Corman
Look for the original.
1961
Ok, that's the one.
Thanks I really should watch it :)
@EmilioPisanty what's this business about the Delta function?
Certainly the proposed solution is a solution for all $t \neq 0$.
Anonymous
15:02
Peace. JEE is finally over :D! @0celouvskyopoulo7 Won't bug you again :D
Congrats.
How was the paper?
Anonymous
It was reasonably good :)
Anonymous
Didn't check my marks though
Anonymous
15:05
I'll sleep for one month straight
Anonymous
Time to learn cool new stuff in maths now
Anonymous
Suggest me something :)
Sleep well :)
Anonymous
Topology ?
15:07
nah, take a well deserved break
Anonymous
@user314159 Yep :P
@blue Let me think.
Anonymous
BTW hi, didn't see you here before
I'm a lurker :-D
I can recommend multivariable calculus. That's the biggest gateway to the cool stuff (manifolds etc). I can recommend a good series of video lectures
Anonymous
15:10
@BalarkaSen Which series of video lectures? :-)
Anonymous
(Don't say MIT OCW :P)
Anonymous
That's Ted! :D
Anonymous
lol
Anonymous
Okay sure
Anonymous
15:11
Thanks :D
yup
watch it at your leisure. it's v good (so is his textbook but it's not available online)
Anonymous
@BalarkaSen You have his textbook? Should I buy it? (I think I need some exercises as well while learning MC)
Yeah I have it. You can buy it but it's hella expensive
Anonymous
@BalarkaSen How much? :P
I can suggest alternative textbooks (which I do not find as good as his) if you want
Anonymous
15:14
What's the cost anyway?
Anonymous
Is it on flipkart?
Anonymous
Or amazon?
yeah it's there
Anonymous
Anonymous
15:16
Link?
that's a scam
Anonymous
:O
Anonymous
I'm broke
Anonymous
:P
Anonymous
15:17
17,460!!!!!!!!!!!!!
there's also LibGen, y'know
it's not in libgen
unfortunately
Anonymous
My monthly pocket money is 1000 Rs (for buying stationary and books). I need to save my money for 2 years to buy that book. Lol :'D
Anonymous
I'll make do with the video lectures I guess :D
Can't you get it through the library?
15:20
Well use an alternative book. There are still some good books out there
how much is 17,460.00 in real money?
Anonymous
@user314159 Which library ?
about $250 i think
Anonymous
250$ is a looooooot in India
Any university library
15:21
250$ for a book is a lot everywhere
@DanielSank yes, obviously
But what about $t=0$?
Anonymous
@user314159 I'll see. I'm not in uni yet
Anonymous
@BalarkaSen Like?
Presumably there's a sense in which it's a solution at t=0
Or otherwise we're just kidding ourselves that that's the right solution
15:26
@blue Hubbard&Hubbard is a popular one.
it's on libgen
Anonymous
Could you give the link please?
Anonymous
Thanks!
user228700
16:13
I'm well fed now. @JohnR: What did u have for dessert? :-P
user228700
Oh, u're gone. Wokay...
@AccidentalFourierTransformtell — user154547 3 mins ago
@EmilioPisanty well you tell me how to define a derivative at the end points.
rob
rob
16:28
Hello all
Rytsas @rob
rob
rob
"Rystas" isn't a word I recognize. Teach me?
High Valyrian word that I think is essentially wishing the other person 'good health' and is used as a greeting
@rob he talks in Game of Thrones.
@DanielSank Yes. Yes I do - it's the main source of my rep in SciFi SE
16:33
@Mithrandir24601 you know, when someone says they don't know "Rystas", they probably don't know "high Valyrian".
rob
rob
Huh. I thought I had read all the books but I don't think I picked up any Valyrian.
Maybe I skimmed it the way that I skimmed the Elvish in LotR.
It's like if someone asks "what's quantum mechanics" and I talk about entanglement.
@rob heh, yeah and the songs too...
@DanielSank Well... It's not actually in the books - it's one of the many words David Peterson invented for the TV show, so most people who've read the books still won't know what the word means
rob
rob
@DanielSank No, I sang the songs.
@AccidentalFourierTransform — user154547 7 mins ago
rob
rob
16:36
@Mithrandir24601 Ah, I see. I've only watched the first season of the shows.
@rob It eventually gets better (to my mind) somewhere around season 4, if you could be bothered to keep watching for that long
@rob very good.
(I think I just said 'rytsas' to someone on Worldbuilding chat one day for a lack of anything better to say and it kind of stuck)
Heh.
Well then, добрый день to you.
Let this be our habit.
@DanielSank Sadly, my Russian-English dictionary's at home (yes, I do have a Russian dictionary), but why not? :)
user228700
16:41
@DanielS: Hello! :-)
rob
rob
@Mithrandir24601 اهلاب إلّ hbar أيدون
@DanielSank that's... sort of why I asked the question
I mean, $\Psi(x,t)$ is highly singular as $t\to 0^+$
rob
rob
@AccidentalFourierTransform "God is hbar"?
rob
rob
16:47
I think "hbar is great" would be "hbar akbar", which is almost a pun.
that was the joke :-/
@DanielSank but just because $\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x}$ doesn't exist, that doesn't mean that I can't talk about $f'(x)$ in the distributional sense.
so, for instance if $\theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function, you can say $\theta'(x) = \delta(x)$
where the (distributional-sense) derivative of $f(x)$ is defined as the distribution $f'(x)$ such that $\int f'(x) \varphi(x)\mathrm dx= -\int f(x) \varphi'(x)\mathrm dx$ for all $\varphi$ in some suitable set of test functions.
@AccidentalFourierTransform well, it kinda depends on the space of test functions
@rob I'm afraid you lost me on that one :/ The best I can come up with using the internet is something to do with replacing hbar for something?
16:54
hmm that derivation is kind of weak
but for $\theta'(x) = \delta(x)$ it's pretty easy with the definition above
@AccidentalFourierTransform yeah, but that's what makes it so powerful =P
it was a pun :-/
rob
rob
@Mithrandir24601 I was going for "also, welcome to hbar" but I don't know how to spell yet.
@AccidentalFourierTransform a bit
16:55
@rob Ah, thanks! :)
but responding to a pun with a joke is also in the game, no?
In mathematics, a weak derivative is a generalization of the concept of the derivative of a function (strong derivative) for functions not assumed differentiable, but only integrable, i.e. to lie in the Lp space L 1 ( [ a , b ] ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {L} ^{1}([a,b])} . See distributions for an even more general definition. == Definition == Let u {\displaystyle u} be a function...
@AccidentalFourierTransform yeah, but weak derivatives act on $L^1$ functions
this acts on a much wider set
weak derivatives is a vague concept actually - it can act on whatever you want them to
it works everywhere
just call something "weak", bam, it works for anything
2
@AccidentalFourierTransform so... calling something weak just makes it stronger?
16:57
exactly. Now you're thinking in math terms
I mean, it doesn't kill it
Anyways, if you're so into strong weak derivatives, you should have a go at this one
1
Q: The explicit solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for a free particle that starts as a delta function

Emilio PisantyA previous thread discusses the solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for a massive particle in one dimension that starts off in the state $\Psi(x,0) = \delta(x)$. This can easily be solved in the momentum representation, which can be Fourier-transformed back to the position represe...

im going to vote to migrate that post to Math.SE
you know why?
@AccidentalFourierTransform that is nitpicking
=P
because you didnt set $\hbar=1$
@AccidentalFourierTransform Knowing exactly nothing about weak derivatives, what happens if $\psi\left( a \right) = \psi\left( 0 \right) \neq 0$?
17:01
@EmilioPisanty call me a perfectionist if you want
@AccidentalFourierTransform I do
@Mithrandir24601 what makes you think I know about weak derivatives :-P
but well, typically weak derivatives is a global concept
what happens at a particular point is irrelevant
@AccidentalFourierTransform Well, you made the claim that 'it works everywhere', so that's more than I know...
@Mithrandir24601 what happens if what?
weak derivatives look like $D=\partial+i\tau\cdot W$
17:04
@EmilioPisanty The Wiki page says "for all infinitely differentiable functions $\varphi$ with $\varphi\left( a \right) = \varphi\left( b \right) = 0$", so what happens if it's not zero?
@Mithrandir24601 ah, you meant $\varphi$, not $\psi$ =P
@EmilioPisanty yeah, sorry - that was my not reading the thing closely enough :P
@Mithrandir24601 weak differentiation and distributional differentiation are always defined with respect to some set $S$ of test functions
if you change $S$, you change the notion of differentiability
... in a messy way that depends heavily on the details
@EmilioPisanty OK... So, in essence, it might not work, as it's not defined (unless you work through the gory details)??
@Mithrandir24601 it kinda depends
I've never particularly cared about weak differentiation over a finite domain
though I guess it's interesting enough
if you were working on a finite domain
and for whatever reason you cared about test functions that don't vanish on the boundary
then yes, you'd have to modify that definition
the point is that the weak derivative should "look the same" w.r.t. integration by parts
i.e. you have some function $f(x)$ and you want to define $f'(x)$
you do that in such a way that $$\int_a^b f'(x)\varphi(x) dx = \left.f(x)\varphi(x)\right|_a^b - \int_a^b f(x)\varphi'(x) dx $$ holds for as wide a variety of $\varphi(x)$s as possible
if you care about $\varphi(x)$s that don't vanish at the edges of your (finite) domain, then you'd need to include the boundary terms in the definition
17:11
@EmilioPisanty I'd never heard of the thing until today. Kind of looks potentially interesting/useful (integration by parts tricks usually are...)
but that's a bit problematic because the value $f(x)$ at the boundary is the value at a point and those can often be changed at will (in the $L^p$ kinda paradigm) or might not be defined (if $f(x)$ is a distribution) or might require stronger assumptions (like continuity of $f(x)$ at the boundary) than you'd be willing to require
@EmilioPisanty I was going for the 'not well defined'...
@Mithrandir24601 yeah, it's a very powerful trick. It hinges on the fact that the RHS will be defined for a much broader class of $f(x)$s than just differentiable ones, and the fact that the set of $\int g(x)\varphi(x)dx$ (where $\varphi(x)$ ranges over a wide enough set) is essentially a unique fingerprint of $g(x)$.
@Mithrandir24601 no, it'd be well defined, you just need to use a slightly different definition
but it does introduce some more questions about how you handle the details
plus, in many situations it'd be dubious as to how much extra oomph you'd get by allowing the $\varphi(x)$s to not vanish at the boundary, since there's very complete sets that do
@EmilioPisanty Ah, sorry - I meant your 'value of $f\left( x\right)$ at the boundary not being defined' causing issues
@Mithrandir24601 yeah, precisely
17:18
Ah, OK
so, for some classes of functions it might not make sense
but for others it would be just fine
so yeah, lots of fine print
which very quickly gets boring if you're a physicist
but, on the other hand, if all you want is to define, say, a rigged Hilbert space
then you just find one of a few canonical choices that work really well, and you run with those
@EmilioPisanty I think it would just go something like "this definition requires the function to be zero at the boundary... Ok, let's assume that it goes to zero at the boundary and see what happens" :P
In essence, it's messy maths...
@Mithrandir24601 no, so here's the thing: the object of interest is $f(x)$, and the $\varphi(x)$s are just tools
you just choose the toolset that's most useful
i.e. you choose the set of $\varphi(x)$s that will get you the definition of differentiability that strikes the right balance between power and generality
... in talking about the $f(x)$s
@AccidentalFourierTransform ???
@EmilioPisanty AHH - it makes more sense now - that's what I get for not reading the whole thing :P
@Mithrandir24601 yeah, it's a subtle point
even if you'd read the whole thing, it'd probably still not have been clear
the wikipedia definition is OK but it's not great at explaining what's going on
@AccidentalFourierTransform I... disagree, I guess?
you dont understand greatness I guess
17:26
@EmilioPisanty I would have at least noticed that the thing we're trying to differentiate is $u\left( x\right)$ and not $\varphi\left( x\right)$...
@AccidentalFourierTransform possibly, yes
great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds
@AccidentalFourierTransform they laughed at Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the clown
i didnt laugh at Bozo, he's a great guy
Galielo, on the other hand, what a clown
21
Q: Rigged Hilbert space and QM

jimi hendrixAre there any comprehensive texts that discuss QM using the notion of rigged Hilbert spaces? It would be nice if there were a text that went through the standard QM examples using this structure.

for more details, with actual physics instead of idle wondering of mathematical edge cases
17:39
anyone knows what those differential are supposed to mean?
@EmilioPisanty Thanks - I think I've got some sort of vague, not very good notion of what's going on :)
@AccidentalFourierTransform nope
source?
what's $t_n$?
I would expect both $l_n,t_n$ to be vector fields on the circle
@AccidentalFourierTransform that's horrifying
17:47
@AccidentalFourierTransform so... some kind of Bargmann space manipulation thing?
@AccidentalFourierTransform what's $t$ meant to be there?
what's... what I dont know :-P
I expected it to be a vector, so I would have written $t_n=z^n\frac{\partial}{\partial z}$
but I must have misunderstood something
@AccidentalFourierTransform but you run into trouble much earlier, no?
apparently, it is a tensor density
but the notation $(\mathrm dz)^{-1}$ seems non-standard to me
17:51
$T(d\varphi)^{-\lambda}\in\mathcal{F}_\lambda(S^1)$ a tensor density of degree $\lambda$
whatever that is
as if, the $\mathrm dz$ is just a standard differential form
and the exponent denotes its degree
which is something I had never seen before
but why the minus sign?
@AccidentalFourierTransform wtf is that?
and there, degree $-1/2$
the degree of a tensor density?
I though that it was the thing where you have $T\to J^\lambda T$ under a change of variables
where $J$ is the Jacobian
and $\lambda$ is the degree
17:53
I... guess that's a thing, then?
I mean, $J^{-1}$ and $J^{-1/2}$ kinda make sense
so long as $J$ is not too terrible
In differential geometry, a tensor density or relative tensor is a generalization of the tensor concept. A tensor density transforms as a tensor when passing from one coordinate system to another (see classical treatment of tensors), except that it is additionally multiplied or weighted by a power W of the Jacobian determinant of the coordinate transition function or its absolute value. A distinction is made among (authentic) tensor densities, pseudotensor densities, even tensor densities and odd tensor densities. Sometimes tensor densities with a negative weight W are called tensor capacity. A...
I guess it makes sense, but the notation is not particularly clear
and I had never seen it, so if its non-standard, they could have defined what they meant :-P
but hey, thanks, that helped
@AccidentalFourierTransform lolz
@AccidentalFourierTransform always happy to sit by the wayside and watch trainwrecks
 
1 hour later…
19:15
Any takers on who this illustrious mustachio'd gentleman is?
@Kaumudi.H Cherry sponge cake with custard!
@EmilioPisanty I'd say that was Vladimir Fock.
@JohnRennie and you totes did it with no help of google image search?
Given that the URL is:
`https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/Vladimir_Fock_-_photo.jpg`
Rats, how do you quote URLs in chat?
@JohnRennie ah
well, then
have a crack at the other three, then
Ah a test of my ability to read Cyrillic ...
19:23
hello physicists
Cake with custard? That's a new thing for me
Wow. The states-of-matter tag-wiki could use some work, but I am hesitant to dive in myself because I am not really an expert.
@JohnRennie yeah, and not particularly easy Cyrillic either
@dmckee "Solid can not be deformed under pressure." O_o~ you're definitely right there
second one doesn't even make all that much sense as written, there's no way CMHPHOB has enough vowels
and no way no how is that first Н a И
@dmckee yeah, tag wikis are all in need of work
By the way, the OP of physics.stackexchange.com/questions/334617/… seems to be a very earnest school-kid, and we'd do well to help out, but he question is not really good for the site.
2
GTG.
@JohnRennie cheater
@DanielSank totes
@DanielSank have a crack at that medal, though
actually, no, scratch that, I've a better use for your Russian skills
the Russian chorus near the end
how accurate is it?
20:06
0
Q: Latex isn't displayed since a few months (Firefox on Linux), what does Latex need to be displayed?

no_choice99It's been a few months Latex is not displayed anymore on my Firefox on Linux. It's still displayed on Wikipedia and many other websites though, only Physics Stack Exchange (and a Physics forum) seem to have this problem. I do have some extensions, but even when I disable all of them, Latex is sti...

20:28
@EmilioPisanty medal?
@DanielSank but seriously, though, does that Flanders & Swann chorus change much from English to Russian?
rumour has it that Tom Lehrer used to do that
i.e. just go off in some random tangent in the bits in Russian
20:45
@EmilioPisanty can't listen just now
@DanielSank fair enough
21:07
Hi @DavidZ
How's it going?
Fine, I suppose
rob
rob
21:51
@EmilioPisanty Ah, the Hippopotamus Song. It's a great crowd-pleaser.
@JohnRennie The only software I miss on Linux: SoldWorks
God I wish I had that

« first day (2390 days earlier)      last day (2836 days later) »