« first day (2720 days earlier)      last day (1250 days later) » 

2:00 PM
for a better illustration
The Lp metric of $\Bbb{R}^2$ is given by:
$$d_p(x,y) = |x_1-y_1|^p+|x_2-y_2|^p$$
We can first consider the following discrete case:
Here, we can clearly see that the Lp metric for each region is in order: L1,L2,L3,L4
Thus the distance shown here is given by:
@EmilioPisanty I will have a better look at it when I get home. It is not so clear what OP is trying to do,
$$d(x,y) = \sum_{j=1}^4 d_j(x_j,y_j) = \sum_{j=1}^4 |x_{1j}-y_{1j}|^j + |x_{2j}-y_{2j}|^j$$
Now, to obtain the original case, we need to compute the following limit:
2:15 PM
@Secret that's not the Lp metric. the RHS should be raised to the 1/p power overall
uh. isn't it is the Lp norm that get 1/p and not the metric itself?
The metric is the distance, hence the $d$
blah, you're right
What's the distance between $0$ and $2$
2:17 PM
2 where?
Oh wait, apparently true indeed
Actually, I think I might need to give that line an equation, otherwise I cannot determine where the coordinates of the intersections are
and I need those intersections to compute the limiting case, which I suspect will take the form of an integral due to the partitioning of the rectangular regions
So, let the number of partitions be n. Then we have for the original case:
$$d(x,y) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{j=1}^n |\frac{L}{j-1} - \frac{L}{j}|^j + |\frac{Lm}{4(j-1)}+c - \frac{Lm}{4j}-c|^j = \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{j=1}^n L^j|\frac{1}{j-1} - \frac{1}{j}|^j + \left(\frac{Lm}{4}\right)^j|\frac{1}{j-1} - \frac{1}{j}|^j = \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{j=1}^n L^j|\frac{1}{j(j-1)}|^j + \left(\frac{Lm}{4}\right)^j|\frac{1}{j(j-1)}|^j$$
where we take the convention (alternately, define a piecemeal function to take account of the first and last terms) that "$\frac{L}{0} = x_1$", "$\frac{Lm}{4(0)}+c = y_1$"
and therefore we have:
2:34 PM
@Pieter agreed. But I feel that it needs a 'champion' who understands the site as well as experiment, to help get it to a form where it is clear enough that it's more obviously on-topic.
if not, I'm afraid the sharks'll get it.
it definitely starts off on the wrong foot
should be diagram $\to$ picture $\to$ graph $\to$ code
sorry typo, all the 4s above should be n
@Secret ... maybe keep a reasonable line length?
Will keep that in mind in the future, currently the edit expired thus only mods can fix that
@Secret fair
hmm... I need to think about this again in paper, I have made the wrong partitions...
In case any future reader get confused: I am trying to compute the distance of any curve in a space with a metric that is all the Lp metrics spliced together in the x direction, and the above demonstrate the idea by using a linear curve which is then generalised into arbitrary function curves
2:56 PM
@SirCumference monrong
"The condition that $\Phi$ be continuous should be regarded as a technicality, in that it is very difficult to give an example of a group homomorphism between two matrix Lie groups which is not continuous."
its not a technicality that morphisms in the category of topological groups are continuous :p
its just what the right definition should be
3:19 PM
Yeah, but how many non-stupid maps can you think of that aren't continuous
@Slereah what's a stupid map?
Federer in abstract means less people
@EmilioPisanty the set of all map is the disjoint union of stupid maps and nice maps
Basically am I ever going to encounter such a map unless I specifically look for a counter example
3:41 PM
Natural counterexamples > pathological counterexamples
@Semiclassical so I need to cancel my order of Counterexamples In Analysis?
The line between those two categories is blurry though
@Semiclassical how do you do a blurry > in latex?
$\gtrsim$ is the best that comes to mind
$\approx\succ$ maybe?
hmmm, doesn't line up very well
3:45 PM
the things I do in the name of procrastination
Ok, so update:
that's better
Now the distance of the curve is given by (I am skipping all the steps to prevent stretching the chat box)
Question about ladder operators: if we define $\psi_0$ as the bottom rung (or ground state) and $a_{-}$ as the lowering operator (which is defined as $\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2\hbar m \omega}}(\hbar \dfrac{d}{dx}+m\omega x)$, then why is it always true that $a_{-} \psi_0 =0$? I mean the energies are obviously quantized so how can we be sure $a_{-} \psi_0$ isn't negative?
4:05 PM
$$d(x,y) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{j=0}^n \left(\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}\right)^{x_1+(j-1)\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}} + |f(x_1+j(\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}))-f(x_1+(j-1)(\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}))|^{x_1+(j-1)\frac{x_‌​2-x_1}{n}}$$
@Lozansky IIRC it's a proof by induction or something
@Slereah Hmm weird how Griffiths just assumes it
Use the properties of $a_+ | n \rangle = \sqrt n |n + 1 \rangle$ and the $a_-$ one along with the fact that a ground state exists
I have the proof somewhere if you want
lemme see
Sure, doesn't hurt
Now for a linear function, letting f(x)=mx+c, we thus have:
$$d(x,y) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{j=0}^{n} \left(\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}\right)^{x_1+(j-1)\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}} (m^{x_1+(j-1)\frac{x_2-x_1}{n}}+1)$$
so... it can almost be written as a riemann integral, except the partition term get stuck inside that power
4:17 PM
@EmilioPisanty I left a comment, that the whole question is very unclear. I have not even looked at the code, that is just too much.
5:06 PM
Can someone do a small sanity check for me? We start with the definitions and the proof of Galilean invariance proof given here . physics.stackexchange.com/a/13333/150025
We then define v'=v-u
At the end we get either v'=v or v'=0
Is it true? I am literally going insane over this issue
5:53 PM
hiya @dmckee
Hi, there. Between classes just now.
@dmckee how bad of an inside-joke is this?
I just couldn't resist
the joke just kinda looked at me and said "you know this isn't a great idea, right?" and I said "I do, but imma still do it tho"
@Lozansky iirc it follows from the fact that you want to have normalizable states
@EmilioPisanty ::chuckles:: Took me a while to get the joke, because your link went right to your answer and I didn't see the question at first.
@dmckee =P
the comment is the other layer of in-joke
cf Migdal's profile and mine
6:02 PM
what is a quantum computer
I am
So am I
ACM and Qmechanic definitely are
me 3
@EmilioPisanty Be Nice
2 days ago, by David Z
Jokes (or non-jokes) that imply that posters here are computer programs.
6:03 PM
I won't accept any rules created by a robot
@DavidZ This is clearly out of the line, according to your instructions.
yeah, drop it
@Semiclassical indeed
I hope it was obvious that the joke was on the people who claim that those two esteemed non-bots are bots
but then again "hope the joke was obvious" is indeed a fallible strategy.
6:06 PM
Context doesn't matter, yes
Hopefully this is the last line about moderation on this conversation?
@BalarkaSen it is a classical computer
also some other devices
But no, seriously, how would you describe a quantum computer to a pleb like me?
@BalarkaSen ... it's a computer, but it's quantum?
Well, I was specifically curious about the adjective "quantum" before it. Is there a specific mechanism behind it that justifies the adjective?
@BalarkaSen I'm tempted to say entanglement between the qubits
but the question of what is actually (provably) necessary for a device to be a universal quantum computer is fairly thorny
and may indeed still be open?
so e.g. you can have non-classical correlations without having entanglement
hence the introduction of discord as a measure of nonclassicality
6:10 PM
I see, so you're trying to emulate the theorem that universal Turing machines exist in this context (whatever the formalism is)...?
In quantum information theory, quantum discord is a measure of nonclassical correlations between two subsystems of a quantum system. It includes correlations that are due to quantum physical effects but do not necessarily involve quantum entanglement. The notion of quantum discord was introduced by Harold Ollivier and Wojciech H. Zurek and, independently by L. Henderson and Vlatko Vedral. Olliver and Zurek referred to it also as a measure of quantumness of correlations. From the work of these two research groups it follows that quantum correlations can be present in certain mixed separable states...
if my QI isn't failing me completely
@BalarkaSen But quantum computers are already Turing complete...
@BalarkaSen you mean, because of the term "universal quantum computer"?
@EmilioPisanty I assumed that was a quantum computer which can simulate any other quantum computer, whatever the term might mean, yes
A simple-sounding-but-hard question, I suspect, is what kinds of problems one expects to be easier with a QC than a classical computer
6:12 PM
@BalarkaSen well, there's this
A quantum Turing machine (QTM), also a universal quantum computer, is an abstract machine used to model the effect of a quantum computer. It provides a very simple model which captures all of the power of quantum computation. Any quantum algorithm can be expressed formally as a particular quantum Turing machine. Such Turing machines were first proposed in a 1985 article written by Oxford University physicist David Deutsch suggesting quantum gates could function in a similar fashion to traditional digital computing binary logic gates. Quantum Turing machines are not always used for analyzing quantum...
@Semiclassical "one expects"?
that's one weaselly qualifier right there
who's this "one" that's doing the expecting?
Oh wow that informal sketch-definition is interesting.
don't call my pal a weasel ;-P
Do I spot a potential question suitable for the quantum computing SE?
We'd rather like more questions :P
6:14 PM
@Mithrandir24601 isn't "What is a quantum computer" already there?
@Mithrandir24601 Probably "Gib a summary of everything about quantum computers b0ss" is not suitable
@EmilioPisanty I don't recall anything quite so explicit, but we've got things on e.g. 'models' of quantum computation etc.
@BalarkaSen Sadly not :/
8 mins ago, by Balarka Sen
Well, I was specifically curious about the adjective "quantum" before it. Is there a specific mechanism behind it that justifies the adjective?
@BalarkaSen how about "they are devices kinda like classical computers in BPP, except they can make use of the fact that QM has probability amplitudes instead of probabilities, and they can engineer situations where the probability amplitudes for the wrong answers interfere destructively, leading the system to output the right answer with high probability"
in that connection, try e.g. Shor, I'll do it by Scott Aaronson
@EmilioPisanty Kinda like? That's a universe sized like...
6:18 PM
I like that idea, but being mathematically minded, a formal "example" might be nice.
I'll look at that link
In quantum computing, the quantum Fourier transform (for short: QFT) is a linear transformation on quantum bits, and is the quantum analogue of the discrete Fourier transform. The quantum Fourier transform is a part of many quantum algorithms, notably Shor's algorithm for factoring and computing the discrete logarithm, the quantum phase estimation algorithm for estimating the eigenvalues of a unitary operator, and algorithms for the hidden subgroup problem. The quantum Fourier transform can be performed efficiently on a quantum computer, with a particular decomposition into a product of simpler...
this, then?
Thanks! Having a look.
@EmilioPisanty @BernardoMeurer COBOL problems :P
@ACuriousMind gotta fix your code in your 1973 business?
@ACuriousMind I feel bad for you son
6:21 PM
@Slereah I think the oldest code I've seen so far was timestamped 1991 :P
user image
ah, lovely
preserved for posterity
@ACuriousMind @DavidZ @dmckee @Qmechanic @rob do we really have to put up with Duffield spamming the site every time anyone so much as mentions general relativity? This is his latest effort:
A: Physical intuition for the Wilczek-Parikh tunneling picture of Hawking radiation

John Duffield There's a naive pop-sci explanation of Hawking radiation, where a particle-antiparticle pair is produced just inside the event horizon. The particle with positive energy tunnels out and escapes, while the one with negative energy falls in, so the black hole shrinks. Yes, it's a naïve pop-sc...

It's not even remotely an answer.
Yeah I'm losing a lot of my precious internet points downvoting him!
The question is about QFT on a curved spacetime and Duffield has just trotted out the same tired old non-arguments without even making a token effort to answer the question.
I call gish gallop
6:23 PM
It's got to the stage now where it's just spam.
@JohnRennie If they're really not an answer just flag them as not an answer. Just don't flag them just because they're wrong.
He's no longer trying to contribute to the site at all. He's just making it a worse place for everyone else.
@ACuriousMind what's the limit between a question being wrong and not being an answer
@Slereah For instance, the answer in question is not an answer because it does not even attempt to give an answer to the very specific questions asked in the OP.
can't we flag all JD answers like that :p
Pretty sure it's the case for most of them
6:27 PM
@JohnRennie As I've mentioned elsewhere, I'm wary of scrubbing the public record of those negative contributions.
To an extent, we need them so that it's clearly and publicly evident just what sort of contributor he is.
@EmilioPisanty no, we need him to stop spamming. Ideally for good.
@JohnRennie I'll go get the gun
@JohnRennie I mean, ideally, yes.
But Duffield (together with a few others) has found an enormously weak spot, caused by the core SE mechanics, in this site's defenses against pseudoscience. And I don't know that there is a solution.
This one too. It basically ignores David's question and just goes off on his usual tangent.
A: Equivalence principle and the meaning of the coordinate speed of light

John Duffield Does the equivalence principle give us a means to tell if variations in the coordinate speed of light have absolute or only relative significance? No. Scientific evidence tells us that black holes exist, and therefore the coordinate speed of light has an absolute significance. So much so tha...

@EmilioPisanty Moderator involvement
sounds like the solution
6:30 PM
And this:
A: Why are there negative energy particles inside a black hole?

John Duffield Why are there negative energy particles inside a black hole? There aren't any. Just as there aren't any negative any particles in the room you're in. Dirac came up with his hole theory in 1930, but space is not full of negative-energy particles. And it is definitely not full of infinite-neg...

@Slereah It doesn't to me.
@JohnRennie Then flag as NAA :P
@JohnRennie Again, flag 'em if you think they are not answers.
A proper solution would avoid putting moderators in a position to judge technical correctness of any post.
And plenty more if I wanted to try the chat room member's patience any further.
@EmilioPisanty it's not a case of technical correctness. His answers don't address the question.
Or he'll make a token one line reference to the question before mounting his soap box again.
6:31 PM
@JohnRennie (and in any case, if answers do get deleted, then I would argue that it would be good to keep a record of their URLs for future reference)
Hey all, I'm in a meeting right now but I can get back to y'all about those pings in like half an hour
@JohnRennie Seriously, if they don't answer the question, it's Not An Answer, so flag as NAA :P
@EmilioPisanty I used to moderate a physics chat
I can tell you that JD wouldn't have lasted there!
@DavidZ Here's adding a gratuitous ping to the pile just to add to the SNR (to its detraction). ::grin::
We had another crackpot there, man
6:33 PM
lol :P
The guy who wrote this book :
it's about the same level of crazy as JD
@Slereah no thanks, I'm not giving cranks traffic for free
The point is that we all try really hard to make the PSE a great place. And when I see posts that are effectively just a personal manifesto it's really frustrating.
Ok, I've let off steam now. Time for my armchair and the usual cold beer I think :-)
@Slereah Reminder: We generally discourage talking negatively about people here when they cannot respond, as is for the forseeable future the case for John Duffield. Also, please don't call people crazy.
He can send me a postcard
6:37 PM
Crazy like a fox?
Q: Where does the phrase "crazy like a fox" originate?

Mason WheelerIf you say that someone is "crazy like a fox", it means that their behavior appears to be insane or nonsensical at first glance, but there's actually something very clever and subtle to it that's working toward their interests in unexpected ways. Where does this phrase come from? What do foxes ...

@EmilioPisanty Yes and yes :P
@ACuriousMind user myopia, man
totally a thing
@ACuriousMind the fact that a given user cannot respond on chat is independent from the fact that they may or may not be exhibiting behaviour on main that is harmful to the site
6:41 PM
@EmilioPisanty I read around for a while. Here's what I can catch (disclaimer: I know shamefully little about both quantum computers and classical computers alike):
in this theory, the circuits are modeled on quantum gates, which take in values in the 2-dimensional Hilbert space $\Bbb C^2$ (elements of which are the "quibits"), with $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$ being the basis quibits, replacing the classical logic gates, which take in binary inputs. The quantum logic gates are unitary linear transformations of $\Bbb C^2$, so just elements of $SU(2)$.
fail in bra-ket
@BalarkaSen yes
but be careful
the correct classical model isn't regular circuits
it's reversible computing
Reversible computing is a model of computing where the computational process to some extent is reversible, i.e., time-invertible. In a model of computation that uses deterministic transitions from one state of the abstract machine to another, a necessary condition for reversibility is that the relation of the mapping from (nonzero-probability) states to their successors must be one-to-one. Reversible computing is a form of unconventional computing. == Reversibility == There are two major, closely related types of reversibility that are of particular interest for this purpose: physical reversibility...
Of course, XOR is not reversible. Of course.
@JohnRennie not nice.
Yup, he's raised it to a new level.
6:46 PM
@EmilioPisanty Sure. But chat's not really the best avenue to raise main site issues, anyway, that's what meta - for public issues - and flags - for private issues - are for. Chat's this weird place that's both public and looked at by only very few people.
@0celo7 yes I agree with that assessment "I like it" is a much better song from cardi b
I don't think there's much Meta can do
replace the Be Nice policy with the Be Ice policy.
People have complained about it before
freeze JD
6:47 PM
in nitrogen
@eulB Amazing.
Lifetime ban?
@s.patroller indefinite cryogenic preservation is the right word.
that’s what I’m talking about
6:48 PM
seems a bit harsh, imo
let the mods handle him
i’d like to see the look on JD’s face when he’s unfrozen 50000 years from now and people are like “Einstein who?”
@eulB Flash Gordon all over again
@EmilioPisanty So, my next question would be, why is it a good idea to have $a|0\rangle + b|1\rangle \in \Bbb C^2$, ie complex linear combinations of the binary inputs, as the model for the inputs? The classical intuition for binary inputs is just a sequence of "on" and "offs" which generate an electrical signal. How does one plan to build a physical signal which is really complex two dimensional vector?
Quantum magic!
@BalarkaSen because quantum mechanics
6:52 PM
Also, "what evidence?" @eulB :P
we need a game with quantum magic
Mage the Ascension kinda had quantum magic
@s.patroller “bruh we’re literally living inside a black hole wadup”
@ACuriousMind @EmilioPisanty ... Oh. Certain states of certain particles?
@BalarkaSen yes
superposition states, to be precise
6:53 PM
Ok that's kind of a sick idea ngl
"the wave nature of matter", as some PSE contributors might say
@BalarkaSen Not necessarily particles, but yes, certain states.
@BalarkaSen more like uncertain states amirite??? :D
(though those same PSE contributors are just as happy to turn around on a dime and deny the consequences of the wave nature of matter, but hey)
because uncertainty
6:54 PM
I hated the phrase "wave nature" even before certain contributors started throwing it around :P
matter is waves my dude you gotta like live life like you’re ridin the waves
How about "particle nature"?
@EmilioPisanty Back in the days of the trilogy, there were some changes made to address a similar (but more pervasive) situation.
John, Ron and Lubos intensifies
@s.patroller matter is particles my dude you gotta like live life on point
6:57 PM
Ron Lubield
I gotta star that
It's just 2 good
@dmckee if you have an MSO (or similar) link that'd be fantastic
In principle we could ask for a change to address this situation, but we'll need to be able to demonstrate (a) that we're not talking about just one or two people (I have several less visible candidates in mind) and (b) that there is a clear patter that can be used to tag such people and design a deffense.
@EmilioPisanty Let me fish them up.
@dmckee SE was waaaay nimbler in the Trilogy days
@dmckee If you want I can also post terrible answers
To drum up some more examples
6:59 PM
@dmckee there's a pretty clear SEDE case to be made
what’s sede
I've had a look at other sites that could in principle fall prey to the same stuff but their numbers are nowhere near what you get on PSE
@eulB SEDE
@Slereah Ah, ha! A martyr appears, willing to fall on his sword.
yeah I think the issue is that SE is from a computer board, originally
It's harder to have a computer crank
@EmilioPisanty nerf stackoverflow
7:00 PM
Either the code works or doesn't
I guess the History Stack Exchange might
Or the christianity Stack Exchange
@Slereah the obvious candidate is Skeptics
But they are smaller stuff
next up are maths and mathoverflow
does the christianity stack exchange have a rule against heresy I wonder
math gets cranks but they are harder to spot because of the homework questions frequency
every crank has 50 thousand reputation
7:02 PM
biology.se could in principle face a Jekyll&Hyde user who was 50% creationist or anti-vaxxer and 50% reasonable-quality answers to highschool questions
also math gets less cranks overall
@BalarkaSen ah
And usually math cranks are all about numerology
So it's easy to spot
So the starting place is probably meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7322/…, which was [status-planned] for a long time before being declined and replaced by meta.stackexchange.com/questions/42769/….
@BalarkaSen is there a set of query parameters here that brings out the users you have in mind?
7:03 PM
@EmilioPisanty Yes. We'd need to make a good case before they would even take it seriously. And I think you are right about the SEDE case.
@dmckee the thing is, I don't even know what solution to propose
How about we lock the SE people with Duffield in a room
In addition there were changes like question quality monitoring and q-bans (answers, too, but I think that questions were the motivating issue).
@dmckee the SEDE case is here if you want to have a play
@Slereah Quite the opposite, in fact
7:05 PM
@EmilioPisanty I've wondered about adding clauses to the q-ban and a-ban algorithms for extreme cases. I think it is clear that they aren't in there now.
@ACuriousMind I'd better start my own church there, then!
anyone good with knitting here
@dmckee yeah, I guess that with the right hedging and with suitable warnings before they kick in, those might work.
i ripped my fav blue sweater a bit like 3mm but it’s made of wool so i can’t stitch it back with a regular string or it will show
7:08 PM
My main problem is a situation where a user can post a hundred answers, get fifty of them with five upvotes and the other fifty with five downvotes, and make 2k reputation same as someone with 40 answers at score 5.
@eulB Good? No. Basically competent and living with a master (mistress?)? Yes.
@eulB Two levels of response: for "easy" cases you weave in with some matching yarn. Done right it barely shows even if you know where to look. For harder cases you darn and felt. That shows, but not necessarily badly.
@EmilioPisanty I agree, but I think it's going to be harder to make that case tot he team.
@dmckee that it's a problem, or that it should be fixed?
@EmilioPisanty That it is the core problem and that I would like to see something done about it.
I just don't know if achieving that desire is possible.
I mostly think that convincing them that that core problem is indeed a problem won't actually be that hard
doing something about it, though, is a whole other kettle of fish
You know
I wonder if you can write the Polyakov action properly
By writing the volume of the worldsheet from the embedding
instead of the coordinate version
7:20 PM
@EmilioPisanty Hmm I'd have to futz around with this
@EmilioPisanty It looks like @dmckee is taking point on the issue you brought up?
@DavidZ why are you blaming me?
it was the Rennie that brought it up!
but I agree with John and d that it's an important issue
not that I know of a solution
@BalarkaSen On that note, the other mods pointed out to me that what I said before (about no AI jokes) was probably going too far, and after thinking about it I agree - I've softened up on that. So you're totally right that, according to what I said before, the messages you saw would have been inappropriate, but I think going forward the best choice is to just let it go. Sorry for the confusion.
@EmilioPisanty oh, whoops! I looked at the chat transcript and I thought I saw your name next to the message. My mistake, sorry.
@JohnRennie see above
I was in the middle of an interview when you pinged and all I got was a quick glance at the transcript
@DavidZ so is it now OK to straightforwardly claim that ACuriousMind is an AI?
Yeah. I'd just offer the standard advice about being careful with jokes since they can be misinterpreted.
7:31 PM
@EmilioPisanty Maybe don't mention it to those AI risk researchers :P
@ACuriousMind ah, of course
e.g. probably best to avoid calling people AIs in a way that looks insulting, even if the subject of the joke (or others in the room) know it's not.
@DavidZ Thanks for clarifying! I mostly have no problem with that as it's conceivable that one could use the comparison of a user with a computer program to have an indirect jab which is annoying but no less hilarious than what vzn uses in his dialect to mock other people. It's just that when it is an insult and when it is not is heavily context-dependent.
@BalarkaSen Yeah, that's definitely true. The fact that it's easy to miss context online means that we have to be more careful with jokes than we would in real life.
@ACuriousMind though there is now one less fewer AI-risk researcher around to worry about for any world-domination-planning AI
7:33 PM
@DavidZ Fair point.
suspicious? who can tell....
I gotta run for lunch, I'll be back.
@DavidZ I'm pretty busy IRL, just now. I don't think I can do a proper job of framing this up.
@EmilioPisanty An advanced neural network could, because we all know they're magical fairy dust!
@dmckee who you wanna frame, huh?
7:46 PM
My second worst enemy, of course. For killing the person at the front of that line.
Two birds, one stone kinda thing, right?
::thinks about it:: Not sure I can identify a worst enemy just now, so the whole plan is a bust.
@dmckee that kinda depends on how you weigh the relative badness of jail vs death
and also what country you do this in
(meaning, which jail the framed person gets sent to)
I died once
wasn't that bad
@EmilioPisanty Implementation details. But the basic idea is sound.
@dmckee ah, it's a morphism vs antimorphism duality thing?
then yes, I agree
@Slereah pics or it didn't happen
here is me
7:53 PM
@Slereah gotcha
is that the second half of "Einstein and the Evidence"
yes, it turns you into a skeleton
@Slereah So, you could fit into your skinny jeans at that point in your life ... er whatever?
Einstein and the Evidence is a forbidden knowledge
cant tell if a penis joke
7:55 PM
The price to pay to learn it is too terrible to contemplate
how does Duffield keep getting rep lmao
@0celo7 the fact that one upvote is 10 points but a downvote is -2 points
all his top tags have negative scores
As long as he gets one upvote for every 4 downvotes, he's coming out ahead
^ The problem in a nutshell.
7:57 PM
@BalarkaSen So I put "Federer" in the abstract for a talk tomorrow. Wonder if that will scare Morwen away
Topologists are mortally scared of that book
It's known as "Federer's tomb"
people have died in it's pages
this is post-book federer
@BalarkaSen ah, that's an interesting observation

« first day (2720 days earlier)      last day (1250 days later) »