« first day (2705 days earlier)      last day (2522 days later) » 
02:00 - 17:0017:00 - 00:00

02:11
Last night dream involves a computer room with 5 computers where the configuration shifts from scene to scene.
(whcih of course I have no memory of until I woke up)
The 5 computer might be best described as some undetermined configuration where only the number of computers are conserved while the location or even identity is uncertain
A quantum field whoose excitations are computers of various designs maybe?
Actually, it might be interesting to imagine the following: What will a quantum field of laptops be like
02:29
0
Q: The duck is all quacked up

Hot LicksThe duck is there in the bottom corner of your screen. You click on it and it asks "Do you have a microphone". You click "No" and it asks you to say something. Is this sane????

 
5 hours later…
07:19
@Secret Wow! You seem to report your dream scenario every day here. I also make dreams every night, actually even any time I sleep, but I can't remember what I just dreamt.
That's common, back when I was grade 11, it took me some training to be able to start remembering dreams
Also the dreams reported here are not usually the full dream, but only the physics part (likewise, if my dream is reported in periodic table, it will be chemistry focused, and similar for worldbuilding and maths)
This is because past experience of reporting full dreams bore and annoyed users out due to facing a long wall of text, thus I used some of Acuriousmind's advice to simplify it and make them readable
Well, I can usually only remember those dreams with very fantastic scenarios.
I think that's good enough. For me, I can remember dreams 90% of the time, and depends on how much sleep I got
but not all my dreams are surreal, some are very slice of life like
well, I may remember other dreams when I just wake up, but after I brush my teeth and go to toilet and come to reality, I usually have forgot trivial dreams.
yeah it is hard. For some dreams, half of the memory will be gone as soon I woke up
and in some cases, the memory already started to fade within the dream
07:27
I can sometimes recall the dreams I dream last night when I am sleepy or about to fall asleep again.
most of my dreams are also not surreal but some scenarios which can actually happen. however, it's like every place in my dreamland looks different from my reality.
for example, if I dream of my university, it doesn't look the same as it is actually.
Meanwhile, my dream world seemed to be very surreal in general, but also seemed to follow some kind of rules. In many of my dreams in 2015, I and my friends (from high school, uni and primary school) all study in a gigantic campus which is basically an Mc Escher fusion of all the schools I have studied in my life
The general overarching rule of my dream world based on analysing 8 years worth of dream log seemed to be: There's a noninjective map that maps multiple things in real life and fused them into a dream element
I also often have dreams which have classmates from different schools I have attended.They gather together with me, but it's strange, because I don't think they know each other.
My case is partially true, because I once organised a very experimental party that mixes my high school friends with my primary school friends
The outcome is mixed, where the two different groups tend to cluster with each other, but occassionally, some mixing started to occur
In some cases, it is also revealed that some of them actually knew each other from other events
you even have recorded dreams for 8 years? incredible. I get tired of writing diary easily.
Yeah, because I often use my dreams to extract very weird ideas which I put to use
idea dreams are not very common (on average 7-10 per 1-2months), and not easy to recall for me though
07:41
I sometimes use my dream as a guide, but I find my dream is rarely a good guide.
I find my dreams are chaotically generated rather than any clue for me to solve my problem in reality.
For me, my dreams are very good at generating new ideas, but it sucks at solving problems. In the cases where the dream element involves a real world problem I am struggling to solve, it turns out the dream is using its own weird maths which does not make sense in real life
so I have never taken any physics ideas I have dreamt seriously.
If I recall correctly, the only dream which actually end up solving a problem for me, is it simulate the shifting sand land level in super mario 64, causing me to find a way to the boss without knowing about the pillar mechanisms
but that was like 7 years ago
here's a past dream with a strange Mc escher like molecule:
Nov 1 '17 at 12:51, by Secret
Last night dream has what I called an impossible topology. Since it is impossible in planar geometry (but somehow showed as a seamless whole in the dream), the best I can do is to drew this:
08:00
I haven't touched chemistry much since university.
Well, I did have some touch with chemistry in my undergraduate course medical physics, but I haven't touched it much after entering graduate school.
I find chemistry is too memory demanding to be of my favor
08:53
is random geometry an interesting theme as far as its application in physics is concerned?
@CaptainBohemian sounds like it might be related to causal dynamical triangulation?
09:50
@Slereah Really? I have ever tried to read papers about causal dynamical triangulation to try to understand it, but can't judge if it's an interesting field.
it's a sum over triangulation kind of thing
it's like a theme which requires much programming.
Le Supre'me
That looks like a borg ship
pls no spoilers
I haven't reached it yet
oops
09:59
Only TNG DS9 first 4 season and TOS is done
i shouldn't have asked :'(
uh..., that's not really a borg ship, it just look like one.
Infinity Spawn is not something from star trek as far I knew(?)
is that some sort of game?
I have no idea, i just found that ship from googling "cube ship"
10:08
lol okay
@Slereah I just found a professor in math department whose research field column is random geometry and quantum gravity. At first glance of his publications, I can't tell what theory of quantum gravity he is engaged with. Since you say random geometry has application in causal dynamical triangulation, then I guess probably his quantum gravity is in the field of causal dynamical triangulation.
causal dynamical triangulation doesn't look as interesting as loop quantum gravity or string theory.
But I am not sure which of asymptotically safe gravity and causal dynamical triangulation is more interesting. Probably asymptotically safe gravity is more iteresting.
10:27
@PrathyushPoduval The only real Borg spoilers could come from one of the TNG movies and Voyager, anyway :P
there's tons of borg episodes!
Even in Enterprise, for some reason!
Although I think none at all in DS9
@Slereah I can't think of any with relevant development for the larger plot in those outside of Voyager, though, so they're not spoiler-y
Well Enterprise is related to the plot of Star Trek VIII
Hilarious
I kinda hate april first
10:32
@Slereah tbh I was excited when I read the headlines, lol
@Slereah grinch! :-)
It's true
My heart is three sizes too small
> In this way, the astonishing prediction of Peter Eggs about the strong interaction origin of flavour is confirmed. This idea is not implemented in the Standard Model of particle physics and therefore today’s discovery represents an eggstraordinary manifestation of the eggsistance of New Physics.
You know what, assuming the minuscale probability that nature actually played along this joke and actualy gave us a glueball that looks like that way after april, then it will be eggxellant
lol
@Secret I find that sort of pun eggsasperating
Note that making such terrible puns in this room will get you eggscommunicated.
You shouldn't egg him on
10:41
Reluctantly I shall call a halt to the egg puns :-)
Good thinking, they were starting to eggravate me
^lolololololol
@ACuriousMind I'd watched that movie, it was fantastic
but generations was a bit poorly made
I didn't like the way they killed off an old character
Most of the TNG movies are awful
I liked first contact (but not seen the rest)
The first TOS movie is what's awful
over 10 minutes is just kirk in the shuttlepod going to the enterprise
10:52
First Contact is really good
And the one about saving the whales is hilarious, too, though probably involuntarily so :P
I thought that one was going to be quite boring, how wrong I was!
best Star Trek movie is of course Star Trek 6
haven't watched it
Perfect ending of the whole TOS arc
unlike Star Trek 10
oh okay
I didn't like the way they killed off spoiler in generation
it was such a poor ending for such a great man, absolutely hated it
11:04
Certainly doesn't hold a candle to the death of spock (SPOILER BUT EVERYONE KNOWS)
I have a maths question for the team if anyone has nothing better to do ...
well you can try
spock's death was nice, in a way
If I understand correctly the reason division by zero is undefined is because multipilication by zero is not bijective. If this is wrong shout now and I'll slink off quietly.
@JohnRennie Knock yourself out. I've been known to answer mathematics questions.
11:06
as well as his resurrection
In III
All in all I just like II through VI
I even like Star Trek V
one of the funniest/cringiest moments :P
@JohnRennie That seems right.
Was that your question, or just a prologue?
My question is: in modular arithmetic is multiplication (by non-zero numbers) always bijective?
11:08
nope
@JohnRennie No, it's not
@JohnRennie No, only for prime numbers (as the modulus).
Anonymous
Check out zero divisors
So presumably in modular arithmetic division becomes a somewhat fraught process?
11:09
So, for example, in mod 6, division by 2 is always undefined, because there are either 0 or 2 possible answers.
it has troubled me many times
In math speak, you're asking for which $n$ $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ is a field, and the answer is if and only if $n$ is prime.
@JohnRennie "Undefined" doesn't imply "fraught".
@DawoodibnKareem excellent, thanks :-)
Star Trek I wasn't great, but
it had my favorite character
Disco McCoy
11:10
@JohnRennie This stuff has all been studied and is well understood.
@Slereah ha ha that look was fantastic
Gee I wonder what decade that film was made!
Anonymous
@DawoodibnKareem You will stop claiming that once @Secret begins talking about division by 0 ;)
Anonymous
(Although that's in a different context)
So the inability to divide by zero isn't anything special. In the sense that if we incude modular arithmetic there are many such undefined divisors. Division by zero is special only for non-modular arithmetic?
11:11
@Blue Oh no, did Secret have a dream where people were dividing things by zero?
Anonymous
Yeah, and not one
@JohnRennie Nope. If the modulus is a prime, zero becomes special again.
Anonymous
Iirc there used to be a whole chat room dedicated to that topic
@JohnRennie any reason why you're asking all this?
@DawoodibnKareem aha, OK.
11:12
@JohnRennie Essentially, algebra does not view "division" as an operation that needs to be well-defined. It is defined completely only in fields, but algebra generally deals with rings in which multiplication is defined but division is not
@Blue What, Secret's dreams, or division by zero?
Anonymous
@DawoodibnKareem The latter
Anonymous
Which also included the former
The context of this discussion is in fields. In fields, 0x=0 is a theorem, thus you cannot divide by zero without collapsing everything into the trivial ring
@PrathyushPoduval someone challenged he who shall not be named to explain why division by zero is undefined, and that got me thinking about it.
11:14
The stuff I am working on is not in the scope of this discussion, thus Dawood is correct that it is well studied
0 has no reciprocal in the set of real numbers.
Interestingly, zero divisors are not the sole obstruction to division: If the ring is infinite, it can have no zero divisors and still not be a field.
Anonymous
@Secret Do you still have the link to where you stored all those conversations? I'd like to read through them sometime :)
@skullpatrol 0 has no reciprocal in any useful set.
@JohnRennie He who shall not be named o_O
11:15
I did try reading a book about abstract algebra once, but I found myself wondering why anyone would care about all this stuff :-)
@ACuriousMind hmm... which axiom of fields is violated for these rings lacking zero divisors?
cause I thought multiplicative inverse is the only obstacle?
@JohnRennie If mathematicians asked themselves "who cares", mathematics would never advance.
Anonymous
I think it is very important to remember that for fields and rings the 0 you are talking about isn't the usual 0
@Secret $\mathbb{Z}$ is the obvious example of a ring without zero divisors that's not a field.
11:16
Anyway, doesn't abstract algebra come into sub-atomic physics?
@DawoodibnKareem it wasn' t meant to be a criticism. It's a personal failing that I find it difficult to get engaged with maths unless I can see an application.
Maybe the interesting part is that "lack of inverses" can only happen in the infinite case - in the finite case non-existence of zero divisors automatically forces existence of inverses.
@JohnRennie So you want to study AC circuits before you learn to manipulate complex numbers?
Yeah, finite structures generally impose huge constraints to how the elements will behave
@DawoodibnKareem it was when I learned about phasors that I got that AHA moment with complex numbers.
Before then they were something you had to do to get full marks.
11:18
I found complex numbers interesting but couldn't have cared less about phasors :P
@DawoodibnKareem Sure
Operators form an algebra
I challenged JD to explain why division by 0 is undefined :P
Anonymous
@JohnRennie There are plenty of applications of zero divisors in information theory and computer science! Try solving an equation like $x^2+5x+6 = 0$ (mod 12)...they come up very often
Right. When I studied AC circuits, I found all the calculations extremely easy, because I already understood complex numbers extremely well. If my reaction to complex numbers had been "what's the point of this", then when I finally learnt a practical application of them, I would have been well stuck.
:43738149

 Zero term algebra

All discussions on the ongoing project of algebraic structures...
11:19
@ACuriousMind back when I was a teen nerd compuers didn't exist, so we nerds had to entertain ourselves messing with electronics. So I was fascinated by electronics from an early age. Learning phasors was one of those why did I not know this? moments.
it's a bit outdated however
Anonymous
@Secret Thanks!@
Yes, @Blue, but one could argue that solving x^2+5x+6 = 0 mod 12 is a particularly pointless thing to do.
(I realise the youth of today find it hard to believe personal computers haven't always existed)
Anonymous
@DawoodibnKareem I said that it comes up often in CS, IT, and even graph theory
11:21
@JohnRennie That's the effect of history
Anonymous
I can dig up some open problems for you if you wish
people like to take things for granted
@skullpatrol he didn't do it, did he :-)
@JohnRennie It is very difficult to imagine a world without them, yes.
@Blue Useful ones?
@JohnRennie How did people surf the web in the days before personal computers?
Anonymous
11:22
@DawoodibnKareem Well, depends on what you mean by useful. It won't directly help you increase GDP or buy bread :P
@DawoodibnKareem Actually, you can have reciprocals of zero, e.g. in the context of projective spaces, wheels and meadows. What is probably impossible without being trival is a multiplicative inverse of zero
@DawoodibnKareem my parents had an Encyclopaedia Brittanica!
@JohnRennie And the next step is already there - when I see very young children use smartphones and tablets with ease, I realize I'm already a dinosaur myself for not having grown up with ubiquitious mobile devices
@JohnDuffield he gave me the elementary school answer of nothing goes into something :-)
@ACuriousMind I saw, with my own eyes, a friend's child trying to swipe a magazine cover and wondering why noting happened! :-)
11:24
lol
I didn't see the point of Twitter until it became the standard mechanism for publishing United States Government policies.
9
I forget what age she was, but it was under one year and she could already operate an iPad.
@Secret Potato potato.
@DawoodibnKareem Trump really knows how to use twitter to (insert suitable long sentence)
11:31
He really knows. I mean, this is a man who, you ask him, and I can tell you, believe me, it's going to be great. I mean this man is, someone, I mean, he really knows. And he can tell you he knows, And you can tell he knows. And I'll tell you now, it's going to be the greatest, what he knows, when he says he knows it, and you know it is.
Once again, if trump can really do something in the May summit with north korea, then that will really be something
I'm sure that if there's ever peace between the two Koreas, Trump will take credit for it.
11:51
It being traditional to eat lamb at Easter, we are having lamb meatballs for lunch today. Photos may or may not follow depending on how photogenic the meatballs are (meat swilling around in tomato sauce all tends to look pretty similar).
Give that the lamb is a symbol for Jesus I'm not sure why it's traditional to eat lamb, but lamb is good so I shall ignore the theological implications.
[PhD stuff] I found it bewildered how my graph arrangements changes from one style to another as I analyse the data. It's as if I can never made up my mind on how to present the result
@JohnRennie I think you'll find it's to do with smearing lamb's blood on the doors of Jewish families in Egypt, to avoid being killed by angels. In other words, it's a Passover tradition, not an Easter one.
Yup, Exodus 12:1-14.
Though it's not obvious why that tradition made it into Christianity when so many other Jewish traditions were discarded.
Possibly because lamb is widely available and very tasty :-)
You said it yourself - "...lamb is good so I shall ignore the theological implications..."
There's a lot of "ignoring the theological implications" in Christian tradition.
12:02
@DawoodibnKareem there's a lot to be said for the pragmatic approach to these things :-)
Oh, I find modern Christianity to be an extremely pragmatic religion.
But it's probably best if I shut up now, as I'm almost certain to start offending people.
I could ask on one of the Christianity related SEs I suppose.
You are welcome to ask me any religion-related questions any time you like. But best not in this chat room. I believe we have a fair mixture of religions in here, and my views are likely to be offensive to most of them.
Anonymous
I thought most of the people here are atheist hippies
0
Q: Is there any theological basis for the eating of lamb at Easter?

John RennieI'm almost certain that the answer is no and that lamb is eaten mostly because it's available and tasty. However my attempts to Google this have met with limited success. I have found suggestions that the practice originated with the popes towards the end of the first millennium AD, and of course...

12:16
You're saying I'm not a reliable source? Well now I'm offended.
@Blue I went through a bit of a hippy phase in my youth. Fortunately no photos have survived from that era. I have now become a committed pragmatist.
@DawoodibnKareem Oops :-)
The Old Testament codifies the overlap between Christianity and Judaism. There's no reason why Christians would eschew the eating of lamb at Passover. The alleged Christian licence to ignore parts of the Old Testament really just relates to prohibitions on various types of behaviour, and the consumption of various forbidden foods, such as those mentioned in Leviticus 11.
The Jewish traditions that haven't made it into Christianity tend to be the ones that aren't directly mentioned in the Old Testament. Judaism has lots of these.
Anonymous
@JohnRennie What exactly do you mean by"hippy phase" ? :P I can totally imagine you wearing a long multicolored shirt, doing drugs and bike stunts
Anonymous
Dec 9 '17 at 18:59, by ACuriousMind
@dmckee John "Hot Stuff" Rennie. Seems legit.
@Blue I had long hair, wore a kaftan and listened to the Grateful Dead.
I still listen to the Grateful Dead (though not as often)
Anonymous
12:25
Kaftan. Not bad. Good for air circulation
I might have smoked a bit of dope in my time, but back in the 70s everyone was doing that :-)
It wasn't a uniquely hippy thing.
Anonymous
@JohnRennie Haha, expected that one :D
Anonymous
What about bike stunts?
Cannabis is effectively legal in much of the West these days, which has rather taken the fun out of smoking it.
@Blue I did have a motorbike, but only well after my hippy phase. I bought the motor bike when I started my PhD. I didn't have enough money for a car and using trains and the pushbike was getting tedious.
@JohnRennie Beer is legal and yet you still drink it, I'm not convinced by that argument ;)
12:29
@ACuriousMind :-)
I'm not convinced I ever got that much out of cannabis. It made me feel a bit giddy but that was about it. Whereas I love the taste of good beer, love the company while drinking and love the sensation of being (mildly) drunk.
If I look back at my teen self I suspect he only smoked dope out of some misguided notion that itwas rebellious.
Anonymous
Cool, cool. Last time I tried a friend's motorbike I hit into a large tree and damaged the front. I think I'll practice a few more times on other's bikes before buying one for myself :P
@Blue there are pictures of me and the motorbike somewhere in the chat logs ...
There's photos around here but I can't find the biker one
Anonymous
@ACuriousMind wtaf
Anonymous
That one is amazing
12:35
Excellent! :-)
We have the rest of our lives to be old and boring in so there's no reason to start too early! :-)
Anonymous
Someone behind you is wearing sunflowers?
Jup
That was a really fun day
Anonymous
I normally don't like long hair, but that one is actually cute :P
Aha, it was hereabouts:
Feb 26 '17 at 17:21, by John Rennie
user image
Anonymous
Hi there, nerdy lanky :)
Anonymous
12:48
You look great with the big round glasses
13:25
It was the 80s. What can I say? :-)
14:09
Mmm :-)
14:22
looks filled with cheese, reminds of those sizziling hot pizza where you can pull a mile of cheese from it
14:38
@JohnRennie I have a picture for you.
Turned out just right
Goulash! :-)
Wow that looks good.
The sauce looks the perfect consistency.
@ACuriousMind FC5 is just as good as 3
Better even
@JohnRennie I was pretty happy with the result
Equal amounts of meat and onions is the key
And then a shitload of paprika and salt
14:54
[PhD stuff] Thank god I can see 4D surfaces, else this data will be intractable
0
Q: Experimental evidence for lack of femtometer-scale structure of electron?

Jarek DudaThere is some certainty that electron is a perfect point (to simplify QFT calculations). Looking for experimental evidence (stack), Wikipedia article only points arguments based on g-factor being close to 2, especially Dehmelt's 1988 paper extrapolating from proton and triton behavior that RMS (r...

@JarekDuda Please do not post questions here directly after asking them unless you have reason to believe they are of special interest to someone here - we don't want the chat to be potentially flooded with every new question.
I didn't know, my apologies - I see I cannot delete it now
Niot a problem, just keep it in mind in the future
Sure
I have seen John Duffield here, who had similar question - and there were no satisfying responces
I have just spent the last few days looking for evidence and got nothing
15:06
@JarekDuda physics.stackexchange.com/q/24001/50583, physics.stackexchange.com/q/119732/50583, physics.stackexchange.com/q/277565/50583 (already linked in your question) seem very similar, and there are answers explaining the state of the evidence. Can you say why you don't find them satisfying?
The only one is using g-factor, which is very brute extrapolation, and at most excludes electron built from 3 fermions
Cross section is measured of huge gamma, rescaling it to gamma=1 we get femtometer cross-section for electron-positron
Is $e^x \delta = \delta$? I mean $e^x$ is not even a multiplicator function on the Schwartz space?
@Lozansky What's $\delta$ there?
Dirac
Why would you think that equation holds?
$f(x)\delta(x) \neq \delta(x)$, unless you're using a strange notion of either multiplication or equality :P
15:09
Mathematica says so
No but $\Xi(x) \delta(x) = \Xi(0) \delta(x)$ if $\Xi \in \mathcal{M}$
Ah, sure, if you've implicitly using that then the equality holds.
You didn't give any arguments for your $\delta$ so it wasn't clear you were thinking of it just being $\delta(x)$.
But $e^x$ is not tempered?
What has that got to do with anything?
Please give more context for what you're thinking about - it's difficult to tell what you're really trying to ask from such terse one-liners ;P
How many reopen votes does a closed question need to be reopened?
@skullpatrol 5
15:16
Thank you sir.
OK so my book says we define the class of tempered functions $\chi$ such that $|\chi(x)| \leq C(1+|x|)^n, \forall x$ and for these the identity $\chi(x) \delta(x) = \chi(0) \delta(x)$ holds true. But $e^x$ is not a member of this class but it still holds?
Even more restrictive, I want $\chi \in C^{\infty}$ and $\chi^{(k)} \in \mathcal{M}$, $k = 0,1,2,...$ where $\mathcal{M}$ is the class of tempered functions
Why would that only hold for tempered functions? The Dirac delta makes sense as a distribution/measure on all continuous functions
I suspect that you want to do something more - e.g. define the Fourier transform - later, for which the tempered spaces are nice, but that particular property of the Dirac delta doesn't depend on that in any way.
OK that makes sense.
How would I go about showing $x^2 \delta''' = 6 \delta'$?
IBP?
What's IBP?
Integration by parts
15:24
Yes, basically.
Ouch
You could also observe that $\int f(x) x^2 \delta ''' = (f(x) x^2) ''' (0)$ and just simplify the r.h.s. until it yields $6 f'(0)$.
(modulo some minus signs :P)
Yeah, I got minus that
:(
Oh wait
No, that's correct
$f'[\varphi] = -f[\varphi']$
15:30
I meant that my formulae probably lacked some minus signs somewhere :P
I know, but I meant that I would get $-6f'(0)$ as my answer
NB I use $f$ for distribution and $\varphi$ for test function
@ACuriousMind I think it chalks up to $\int_{\mathbb{R}} [6 \varphi'(x)+4x \varphi''(x)+x^2 \varphi '''(x)] \delta'(x) dx$
Looks correct or no?
What's that supposed to be?
When I simplify my r.h.s., I get:
$(f(x)x^2)'''(0) = (f'(x) x^2 + 2 f(x) x )'' (0) = (f''(x) x^2 + 2 f'(x) x + 2 f'(x) x + 2 f(x) )' (0) = (f'''(x) x^2 + 4 f''(x) x + 4 f'(x) + 2 f''(x) x + 2 f'(x) ) (0) = 6 f'(0)$
Since $f$ can be an arbitrary test function, this means that $x² \delta'''(x) = 6 \delta'(x)$, since they have the same action on all test functions.
I don't understand what you did
Hm it should be $6x \varphi''(x)$ in my integrand
@ACuriousMind I calculate $x^2\delta'''(x)[\varphi]$
But this is the same as $\delta'''[x^2 \varphi] = \int x^2 \varphi \delta''' dx$
Exactly, which is by definition the same as $-(x^2 \varphi(x))''' (0)$. That's much easier to just work out by the product rule than trying to integrate by parts or something.
But that minus sign
Oh
Or?
Hmm
15:43
You work that out by the product rule, it comes out to $-6\varphi'(0)$
Ah
Same as $6\delta' \varphi(0)$?
Well, $-6\varphi'(0) = 6\delta'[\varphi]$ by definition. Put everything together and you have $x^2 \delta'''[\varphi] = 6 \delta'[\varphi]$ as desired.
Yes that's what I meant :D
@ACuriousMind Thank you for the expertise
You're welcome
16:09
Praise be unto him on this day of days
Who's that?
One of the ground-breakers
please don't forget the caption
"A. Garrett Lisi and his 222 close personal friends. He needs 18 more to reproduce the roots of E8 and make his theory complete. Click the picture for more details."
Oh wait, it's also on Uncyclopedia?
Did Motl write that page?
Nice choice for this day of all days :P
The bible for this is, of course,
'The main mathematical content in these 30+ pages is the decomposition of the fundamental representation of E8 under its F4 x G2 subgroup. It is an elementary fact that e.g. freshmen in Prague who follow my textbook written with Miloš Zahradník know as equation (12.95). For A. Garrett Lisi, this single line reflecting a simple calculation that has been done a century ago and that a fraction of freshmen learns is a topic for a 30-page paper and an impressive albeit two-dimensional movie.'
I don't know a better motivation to study Lie algebras, except of course that whole physics thing
I have tried, with google chrome translating it, many times, and will try many more
you know it's kind of weird that people latched on to the FRW model so early
Examples in GR are scarce, especially back then!
Up until the 70's we didn't really have any good reasons to expect homogeneous isotropic universes
But then again, I think it's also one of those things where we filter the past
There were probably a bunch of cosmological models that people just stopped caring about
Although I think there's also a bit of like
Having the correct idea by being wrong
In the 20's we knew about other galaxies, but not yet about the megastructures, but not yet that there were no larger structures than those!
"If you care how the forces and particles are supposed to be embedded into his group, it's like this. You start with a non-compact real form of E8, namely E8(24). You embed a G2 into it. Its centralizer is a non-compact version of F4. Now, you embed the strong SU(3) into the G2 while the non-compact F4 acts as the source of a "graviweak" SO(7,1) group that contains SO(3,1),
a "gauge group" that is now fashionable in the circles of amateur physicists to "describe" gravity, and SO(4), their source of cargo cult electroweak symmetry."
Imagine knowing all the subgroups of the lie groups and the crazy people's use of them
Seen a video of Gell-Mann saying the string people need to work more with the cosmology people, hmm
16:53
@Secret Yup. Why not mix meat with cheese when you're following an ancient Jewish tradition?
I don't know of any jewish tradiation, thus I am not sure what you mean here
Why isn't the formula of graphite C6?
02:00 - 17:0017:00 - 00:00

« first day (2705 days earlier)      last day (2522 days later) »