« first day (3659 days earlier)      last day (1566 days later) » 

02:15
@ACuriousMind there is that petition to get xi banned from the Greek alphabet
maybe we can at least get it banned one country at a time. if someone starts the petition for the US and gets a certain number of signatures, the white house legally has to respond to it
e.g. when they responded to a petition to build a real life death star
 
1 hour later…
123
123
03:32
Hi guys. Sorry I was busy yesterday also mobile signals dropped where i was so could not receive any msg. Now i am reading
@EmilioPisanty It means it is necessary to move object with $a = 1 \frac{m}{s^2}$ to calculate the inertial mass?
Inertial mass depend on $\vec{F}$ and $\vec{a}$ . Force needed to accelerate an object.
Also on frictionless surface i assumed the surface is perfectly horizontal that $\vec{W} = -\vec{R}$ , Both forces cancels each other, it is considered as isolated object.
@EmilioPisanty Does it experimentally proven that Gravitational mass equal to inertial mass. Because there are two unknowns equation $\vec{W}$ and $\vec{F}$. which need to be set s standard. Force for an inertial mass.
@ACuriousMind I think Weight is depend Force measure. How do we believe on weight explicitly?
03:48
@JMac Oh, if ASC Creed might be related...!
@SirCumference Wow, really!? Cool!
rob
rob
04:55
Wow, you can really write any garbage you want to on Twitter.
@rob people have mentioned that for the last 4 years :P
rob
rob
@SirCumference You misspelled "ten"
Bransdein Joachain problem 11.1 along with the introductory part of the chapter asserts that the photon density per unit time is quite high for most cases so we can treat EM field as classical...The assumption in the problem I think was to treat the detector as a part of a spherical surface and the source to be a point source...

But what if the surface of the detector was flat, then at large angles from the normal to the surface, photon density is quite small...

Do we need to consider quantization of EM field in such cases?It seems(to me)we don't have to, but Bransden's argument doesn't h
123
123
Hi @SirCumference
123
123
05:04
Pls read my question. If you can help
@123 i'm about to head to sleep, but basically they've been shown to be equal to a high precision
In the theory of general relativity, the equivalence principle is the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass, and Albert Einstein's observation that the gravitational "force" as experienced locally while standing on a massive body (such as the Earth) is the same as the pseudo-force experienced by an observer in a non-inertial (accelerated) frame of reference. == Einstein's statement of the equality of inertial and gravitational mass == A little reflection will show that the law of the equality of the inertial and gravitational mass is equivalent to the assertion that the accelera...
@rob Lmao!
I have a confusion about how should i make fbd of fluid particles in a bucket
Which rotating and revolving
fbd of fluid particles? Don't!
Use blender fluid simulator.
Trying to move to advanced level of this
Is there any existing method or question related to mine? Cauz i cant find any particular keyword by which i can search
05:16
Michel van Biezen......
Cool teacher!
123
123
Yes he did not explain phenomenon in detail. It's my opinion.
who Michel van Biezen? He doesn't. He just gives basic insights of the concepts. Although his lectures are helpful for starters.
I posted question on his video comment but he didn't answered
123
123
@RewCie I have seen so many videos of him. But there are always so many questions left behind.
Can you suggest some way by which i can proceed on my question
05:20
read, Fundamentals of fluid mechanics by Bruce Roy Munson
^I've not completed that one.
Does it include fluids in roatating frame too?
No idea... I've no clue about Fluid Mechanics, I'm just a total noob.
Ask @JohnRennie he must be knowing that all.
Anyone else like sir circumference curious mind ?
CC: @SirCumference
Isaac Newton's rotating bucket argument (also known as Newton's bucket) was designed to demonstrate that true rotational motion cannot be defined as the relative rotation of the body with respect to the immediately surrounding bodies. It is one of five arguments from the "properties, causes, and effects" of "true motion and rest" that support his contention that, in general, true motion and rest cannot be defined as special instances of motion or rest relative to other bodies, but instead can be defined only by reference to absolute space. Alternatively, these experiments provide an operational...
06:13
Yo!
123
123
Yo.......!.....
not again
BTW, how's life?
 
2 hours later…
08:00
Fake mod how did you lost so much rep.?
08:24
@RewCie You've been asked before to stop sharing fake news here. There is no source in that tweet, and none of the standard sources reflect anything of the sort. If you want to post conspiracy theories, do it somewhere else.
2 messages deleted
@123 I'm not sure what you mean
09:17
Do you @ACuriousMind or anyone you know have a piece of the Berlin Wall?
Uh, no. I was born after the wall fell and I'm happy to let museums or people who actually connect something with them to have them :P
@ACuriousMind good grief, now I really feel old.
It's been 31 years!
To the day.
Thanks for that :-)
09:36
Did you watch the Floyd wall concert sir? @JohnRennie
@skullpatrol I saw The Wall when it was originally staged in 1979. n factI saw it twice. I was a fanatical Pink Floyd fan in those days.
I didn't see it when it was staged to celebrate the fall of the Berlin wall.
Coolio
I have to say I find my teenage enthusiasm for The Wall a bit embarrassing these days. When I listen to it now I find it banal and self indulgent.
Why is that? sir
09:54
The Wall is really a Roger Waters solo album. The other three members of the band weren't interested in releasing another album, they had all gone off to make solo albums, but Waters was going through a period when he felt really alienated and wanted to write an album to express his feelings.
Waters is one of the great lyricists, but he's rubbish when it comes to writing the music to go with his lyrics. As a result, apart from a few songs where Dave Gilmour contributed, the music is pretty ordinary.
And to be honest a lot of lyrics sound like they were written by a self obsessed teenager.
yeah, raging against education
Waters was bullied at school. Another Brick in the Wall isn't some enlightened comment on education, just Waters complaining that he hated school. The whole album is monstrously self indulgent.
but, to be fair, they did have "the strap" back then
Waters is also exceedingly rude about his wife of the time. Well, he's currently on his sixth wife and counting. So who's at fault? Every one of his five ex wives, or Waters himself?
10:05
The guy is a genius. Some of his lyrics still bring a lump to my throat after nearly 50 years. But I suspect he's not the easiest of people to live with.
yup, he knows how to hit a nerve. No doubt.
I can talk about Pink Floyd for hours - this might be a good time to find another chat room :-)
Perhaps another time sir. Thanks for the chat.
:-)
10:40
is it correct to say that left and right weyl spinors doesn't have a representation of parity transformation?
@Ratman Usually you have both Weyl spinors sitting inside a Dirac spinor representation and then the parity transformation turns left-handed into right-handed and vice versa
but it's correct that there is no representation of parity on the space of a single Weyl spinor
so if I consider the chirality projection operator $\Pi^-=\frac{1}{2}(1-\gamma^5)$ that under partiy transforms in in $\Pi^+$. Stating that $P\psi_L=P\Pi^-\psi=\Pi^+\psi=\psi_R$ isnt' contradictory, because I am not actually acting parity on a Weyl spinor but on a Dirac spinor projectd?
I recognize I could have written some obscenity here
11:06
Oct 30 at 5:46, by FakeMod
@satan29 I deleted my account during the last few months of JEE, and resurrected it after JEE was over. I have done this deal of deletion and recreation quite a lot of times in the past :)
Ah, the joy in permalinking old comments. Now I understand why everybody does it so often... :P
11:20
My chrome browser is behaving abruptly keyboard is not working when I open chrome
Can anybody help me?
Try pressing the Windows key twice and see if the keyboard starts working again.
I did
It working well in the ms word
Does the mouse work in Chrome e.g. if you click on links in Chrome do they work?
So Chrome isn't frozen? It's just ignoring the keyboard?
11:29
No
Yes
Did this just suddenly start today?
No idea. Any new Chrome add-ons?
Not today but yes day before yesterday
You could try running Chrome in safe mode
i.e. disable all the extensions
95
Q: How to open Google Chrome with extensions disabled / turned off?

t_b_bGoogle Chrome is crashing when I try to open it. I'm assuming that it's probably a bad extension that's causing the problem. How can I start up Chrome with all extensions disabled / turned off?

11:44
@Ratman Yes
Thanks a lot @ACuriousMind
@ACuriousMind any help u can do?
@JackRod Did disabling the extensions not work?
 
1 hour later…
12:57
Hello everybody
I have a question about how to calculate a charge's deflection in a parallel plates system.
I have a question with given values of electric field, distance between plates, length of plates, initial horizontal speed of charge but the question asks me to find the deflection of the charge
I have no idea how to calculate that. I tried to calculate the angle between components of velocity vector of the charge but I found $\frac{\pi}{2}$ as a result.
Can you give me a tip about how to calculate it? I don't need the full solution, I just need that missing information about the calculation.
Jim
Jim
13:27
@ICCQBE wait wait wait. Did you try to find the angle between the components of one vector? Or did you try to find the angle between the initial and final vector?
If the former, of course you got $\frac{\pi}{2}$
@Jim Hmm I divided the magnitude of y component by magnitude of x component
Jim
Jim
well, it should go without saying that the x and y-components are perpendicular. If what you did is exactly as you say, then I'm surprised you got that fraction
I guess I had to find the angle between initial vector (which is parallel to horizontal axis) and final vector, right?
Jim
Jim
@ICCQBE I can't imagine what else is meant by "deflection"
things can only be deflected with respect to their initial trajectory
Okay, would you like to know the question? I'll share the result of my calculation, you might want to compare what I found
Jim
Jim
13:33
nope, not interested in doing 1st year physics math right now. I've got a full day ahead of me of helping students with that
Oh, okay. I understand you :D
Thanks for the help!
By the way
In my question the charge can't escape the parallel plates, it's horizontal speed is too slow.
So, It crashes with plate somewhere, would that be a problem?
Jim
Jim
not really, it just means you have two options: a) use the final velocity right before it crashes or b) make the deflection a function of time. The context of the question should tell you which one is likely preferred
I tried to check other similar questions and they give initial horizontal speed like $5x10^8 m/s$, but in my questions the initial horizontal speed is just $20m/s$ that's what I mean :P
Hmm, okay I'm on it. Thanks for the help again
in two dimensional Minkowski space a rotation free lorentz transformation is called a boost
does this mean that there's no hyperbolic rotation going on?
13:51
"Structures are held to have a real but abstract and immaterial existence. As such, it faces the standard epistemological problem, as noted by Benacerraf, of explaining the interaction between such abstract structures and flesh-and-blood mathematicians."
14:37
nvm
something submitted on 2 Jul 2020 is certainly not "just in"
15:07
I found that now
Yes, this is 2 july
15:20
The date in the PDF is not reliable since if it's inserted via a LaTeX macro it's usually the date of compilation, not of publication. the actual submission dates are on the abstract page
(and it's usually always better to link to the abstract page to not ambush people with a PDF download who might not be on a fast connection)
Hey
What is Phonetics? Why they are being taught to Comtupar Science Engynars?
16:08
What is a comtupar science engynar?
It's just another cool way of saying Computer Science Engineer
I think "cool" is questionable there, but where do you even see that computer science engineers are regularly taught phonetics? I could see it being a useful technical elective if they want to get into like speech recognition or text to speech or something, but I'm surprised it's a regular course.
16:38
@JMac I'm myself surprised to see the syllabus, a lot of things there, management, entrepreneurship, business, economics, game theory, body language, phonetics, political science, dispute management, marketing, chemical and electrical engineering, fitness/yoga/dance and a lot of them in the first year...
I wanted to skip all those.
16:54
Are all of those mandatory? If so I would also be skeptical of taking that program... If you only had to choose a few of those along with other classes it's not too bad.
Total 4 in 1st semester and 4 in second semester.
The college is ACETE Certified engineering college.
So, it's standard B Tech Engineering Program
@JMac Damn! I saw the CS Course Syllabus! It's huge af! Total 60 courses with each course has suggested 2-3 books. These books each have around 800-1200 pages!
I'm screwed, How we are going to cover all in 4 years!?
My god, help me!
Jim
Jim
@RewCie just starting post-secondary?
@Jim what is post secondary?
Jim
Jim
college/university
college, B Tech
Jim
Jim
17:07
seems unsurmountable?
means?
Jim
Jim
does it seem like there's no way you could learn all that in 4 years?
@RewCie To be fair you might not read everything in all the suggested books. Even in 1 book courses I found we rarely covered every chapter. Still though that seems like way too many courses. I had between 5-6 per semester, and my program was considered a heavy course load, and that's still only 48 courses.
yes
@Jim yes
Jim
Jim
standby for helpful advice
17:09
@JMac Wow! BTech?
@Jim ok
@JMac Computer science engineerng?
No, mechanical engineering.
@JMac Oh okay, So you took M Tech?
Jim
Jim
@RewCie here's something I tell my 1st year students a lot: I did my undergrad in space engineering (rocket science). When I started, they told me that in 4 years I'd need to be able to design and build a satellite and get it into orbit (if I could get a permit, which no I can't). That was unbelievable. How would I learn that much in a short time? But 4 years later, it felt obvious, natural, and easy. I didn't recognize the change happening, it was slow.
3
I just did the work day by day, studied what I was given, and kept my head down and it happened
2
the same will be true of you
don't worry
@Jim Wow! We also have one celestial mechanics course in 3rd year, it includes satellite theory and all.
@Jim So, you are a B Tech Engineer?
@RewCie "M Tech" wasn't a thing here. I have a "Bachelor of Engineering: Mechanical Engineering" (BEng) according to my academic record. I feel like my degree might have called it "Bachelor of Engineering" with a major in "Mechanical Engineering".
Jim
Jim
17:16
@RewCie no I'm not, but the same is true around various academic institutions
@JMac Okay, It's BE which is same as B Tech here.
@Jim oh okay! :-)
Thank you all :-)
@Jim BTW where did you take space engineering as a bachelor program? It was only available in masters programs around my neck of the woods AFAIK.
Oh wild guess from snooping your profile location. Was that at Waterloo? I went to Dalhousie and I don't think we had enough students for a space engineering program to be viable as a bachelors.
18:09
I think, in today's Internet rich society, it's tougher to ask students to "keep your head down."
Jim
Jim
18:36
@JMac It was at York. The only school in Canada (at least when I went there) with an undergrad program in it. Everywhere else was masters level
Jim
Jim
@skillpatrol you have no idea how old that joke got on me even when I was studying it. Now I try not to bring it up unless it's actually helpful and play down the importance to avoid that joke
yeah, to my amazement the clip is 11 years old
Jim
Jim
I just meant the whole "it's not rocket science " joke in general. The clip is still pretty funny
Jim
Jim
18:59
@RewCie technically I'm a BASc (Applied Science). We didn't have BEng at the time. But none of that really matters as much as the program being accredited. Got the iron ring to show for that (you Canadian engineers know what I'm talking about)
19:12
@Jim Oh York makes sense. And yeah it doesn't matter what they call it as long as whoever deals with PEng's considers it relevant. Also the proof of participation in the iron ring cult ceremony is a pretty good sign of it being the same thing :P
 
4 hours later…
23:25
kinda confused about principleo equivalence
For example, suppose that we have three uniform spheres of gold, silver and bronze and that the silver and bronze spheres have equal inertial mass. Then the law of gravitation states that, when separated by equal distances, the gold sphere will attract the silver and bronze spheres with equal forces, whereas we would have expected these forces to be different.
why would anyone think these forces will be different
and why does someone think gravitational and inertial mass to be different ?
what is difference between gravitational mass and inertial mass different ?
I think you've gotten confused: the equivalence principle says that the three spheres will be effected by an external gravitational field equally, i.e. the Earth's

« first day (3659 days earlier)      last day (1566 days later) »