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

22:08
Are you using CAD on uni?
Nope, personal project
I should eventually have to do it in uni though
I need to design an enclosure to 3D-Print for a project
But I only know how to use Solid Works
and ain't nobody got time to learn OpenSCAD
@rob indeed
you know Flanders & Swann? I thought they were virtually unknown outside of the UK and you were in the states
Anyone here know a bit of dimensional analysis?
Anyone here know a bit about GSM-enabled IoT microcontrollers?
Fine, I'll go see if I can find any luck in Math's chat
22:23
@LegionMammal978 I'm not mocking you, I actually need help picking a microcontroller that has GSM :)
@LegionMammal978 If you have a question, we generally prefer you just ask it instead of asking if anyone maybe knows something about the general topic - maybe someone will even come by later and answer it
Then what's the exact difference between 1 mol² (of dimension N ²) and N_A(1 mol²) (of dimension N)?
Oh, mol is an annoying "unit"
Yeah, that's why I'm trying to figure this out
Because I'm not sure if a certain unit has dimension mol*m^-3 or just m^-3
mol is a unit, but it is dimensionless. "Amount" is just a number, it does not have dimensions
22:46
@ACuriousMind What are you saying? Of course a mol has dimension. It's dimension is a shitton
In fact I argue the mol be renamed to shitton
That would still be a unit, not a dimension.
mol was the worst thing that happened to me in chemistry
nobody understood it, for some reason
"Yo dawg, I herd u like MOSFETs..."
Good lord
@LegionMammal978 so... which unit is this, specifically?
Anonymous
22:59
@ShaVuklia Really?
Anonymous
The basic concept is quite simple.
@blue and also pretty problematic
at least as far as being a base unit and getting a dimension of its own goes
Anonymous
@EmilioPisanty Mole doesn't have a dimension.
@blue tell that to the BIPM
ditto for ISO and the IUPAC
Anonymous
Eh, conventions can be silly
23:03
Well, but what is the mole if not a convention?
Anonymous
@ACuriousMind I agree it is a convention. But quite helpful in Chemistry atleast.
23:16
Sometimes I fucking love humanity
@ACuriousMind Can you believe that?
Can you believe someone actually thought one day "I wonder if PowerPoint is Turing Complete"
People built Turing machines using Game of Life gliders. No one expects anything less from mankind.
@BernardoMeurer there's a typo
it says
> only more experienced (and desperate) PowerPoint aficionados fully utilize PowerPoint's advanced AutoShape, Hyperlink, and Transition tools for the purposes of image editing, video production, and game design
it should say
> only damn fools utilize PowerPoint's advanced AutoShape, Hyperlink, and Transition tools for the purposes of image editing, video production, and game design
Game... design?
@JaimeGallego cf supra re: "damn fools"
23:29
I imagine it's some sort of Scratch thingy
@JaimeGallego well, since they show it's Turing complete, you can code whatever you want
@BernardoMeurer that's your next task
running Doom over PowerPoint
@EmilioPisanty Meh, I don't want to touch proprietary malware :P
Alas Rust's type system is also turing complete
I would be interested in trying to run doom using only Rust's type system lol
@BernardoMeurer is there a Doom version in brainfuck?
@ACuriousMind So why does the SI define another fundamental unit? Why don't we just use multiples of the dimensionless constant N_A (1 mol)?
presumably it's possible
23:32
Nah, doing the graphics would be too insane
I don't even know if it would actually
Because of GFX
@BernardoMeurer GFX are still part of Turing compts, no?
35
Q: Why is the mole/"amount of substance" a dimensional quantity?

Tim PederickAccording to the BIPM and Wikipedia, "amount of substance" (as measured in moles) is one of the base quantities in our system of weights and measures. Why? I get why the mole is useful as a unit. In fact, my question isn't really about the mole at all; I just mention it because what little infor...

Yeah, sure, you could do all the maths happening in the GFX, but displaying it would have to be provided by the language somehow
12
Q: Why is the mol a fundamental physical quantity?

Abhinav DhawanI am starting to study physics in detail and as I read about physical quantities, I was puzzled why mol (amount of substance) is taken as a physical quantity. A physical quantity is any quantity which we can measure and has a unit associated with it. But a mol represents the amount of substance ...

I image at least
In brainfuck this would be quite a herculean (perhaps sisyphean) task
@BernardoMeurer surely there's translators from C to brainfuck, though?
23:35
@EmilioPisanty Still don't see how the accepted answer helps
@EmilioPisanty Not as far as I know, alas I'm not a brainfuck expert
Brainfuck cannot do the low-level brouhaha C can
@LegionMammal978 point is, has been treated in main already, and that's as far as it got
@EmilioPisanty I haven't seen any of those (although I have seen BF to C)
@BernardoMeurer can it not?
huh
Besides, BF mostly just describes Turing machines, whereas C has many, many, many layers of abstraction
23:37
ah man, today's been great
@heather kudos
@EmilioPisanty Brainfuck is not compiled, is it?
@EmilioPisanty Perhaps it would work with some sort of virtual memory scheme for interrupts, etc.
@BernardoMeurer No, not really
@BernardoMeurer no idea
i spent basically the whole day hanging out with friends at an amusement park. we all just joked around and rode high-adrenaline rides.
23:38
(source: am from PPCG)
absolutely amazing.
You're better off just using Assembly
also, my level of caring is at about 15-20% on that topic
And then may god have mercy on your soul
@BernardoMeurer naw, the challenge is running Doom on brainfuck
23:39
Because I'm coding MasterMind in assembly right now and I want to blow my brains off
@BernardoMeurer there's already Doom versions written in assembly, no?
@EmilioPisanty I don't know. All I did was run Doom on a calculator :P
@BernardoMeurer or does the C compiler skip assembly and go directly to machine code?
I mean, if you can't translate C to assembly, what's assembly even for?
@EmilioPisanty I can't speak for all C compilers, but I know that GCC generates ASM first (IIRC)
If you call GCC with the -S flag it will generate assembly for you
@BernardoMeurer so you can just compile to assembly and you're done
23:41
holy shit
I will do the assignment in C
and compile to assembly
fuck you system
@BernardoMeurer will you be asked to explain your code?
Yes, but the professors never have any idea what the fuck I'm up to anyway, lol
I guess it depends on how human-readable the gcc-compiled assembly is
My programming prof doesn't even bother to read my stuff, he just sees it works and gives me an A
probably not very
23:42
Oh it's shit alright
the ASM GCC generates is ultra-optimized brouhaha
Alas you can turn optimizations off
@BernardoMeurer how was this not an obvious option from the get-go?
maybe that makes it better
and write ASM-like C with GOTO and so on
@EmilioPisanty I haven't been in my best mental state
just sayin'
Today I even missed a "That's what she said" joke, and that's when you know I'm bad
@BernardoMeurer that's...
what she said =P
And then you turn in the GCC-generated assembly and it still has the added metadata :p
@LegionMammal978 seriously, though, there's plenty of metrologists that will up and tell you that the concept of a base unit is only kept around for historical compatibility
10
Q: What is a base unit in the new SI, and why is the ampere one of them?

Emilio PisantyOne question that comes up pretty much always in introductory electromagnetism courses is Why the base unit of electrical measurements is the ampere and not the coulomb, and the usual answer is that it is more accurate, and metrologically more useful, to build electrical measurements around measu...

for an example

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